

Outside of the costs of hardware, its just power. Running these sorts of computations is getting more efficient, but the sheer amount of computation means that its gonna take a lot of electricity to run.
Outside of the costs of hardware, its just power. Running these sorts of computations is getting more efficient, but the sheer amount of computation means that its gonna take a lot of electricity to run.
they know it’s impossible to do
There is some research into ML data deletion and its shown to be possible, but maybe not on larger scales and maybe not something that is actually feasible compared to retraining.
While you are overall correct, there is still a sort of “black box” effect going on. While we understand the mechanics of how the network architecture works the actual information encoded by training is, as you have said, not stored in a way that is easily accessible or editable by a human.
I am not sure if this is what OP meant by it, but it kinda fits and I wanted to add a bit of clarification. Relatedly, the easiest way to uncook (or unscramble) an egg is to feed it to a chicken, which amounts to basically retraining a model.
Always has been. The laws are there to incentivize good behavior, but when the cost of complying is larger than the projected cost of not complying they will ignore it and deal with the consequences. For us regular folk we generally can’t afford to not comply (except for all the low stakes laws that you break on a day to day basis), but when you have money to burn and a lot is at stake, the decision becomes more complicated.
The tech part of that is that we don’t really even know if removing data from these sorts of model is possible in the first place. The only way to remove it is to throw away the old one and make a new one (aka retraining the model) without the offending data. This is similar to how you can’t get a person to forget something without some really drastic measures, even then how do you know they forgot it, that information may still be used to inform their decisions, they might just not be aware of it or feign ignorance. Only real way to be sure is to scrap the person. Given how insanely costly it can be to retrain a model, the laws start looking like “necessary operating costs” instead of absolute rules.
I liked the sequels, at least probably more than your average person, but I still think they are trash. The individual plot beats are fun, the cinematography is great, the characters feel like they largely fit in the universe, and it makes some decent political commentary. But bring it all together and it just doesn’t really make a lot of sense, moment to moment its great but you start to think even a little bit and something always feels a bit off.
My vote for Biden was an anything but trump vote, but given Biden’s current record as president he has my vote again.
Still not my first choice but we live in a first past the post voting system so gotta take what you can get.
The real AI, now renamed AGI, is still very far
The idea and name of AGI is not new, and AI has not been used to refer to AGI since perhaps the very earliest days of AI research when no one knew how hard it actually was. I would argue that we are back in those time though since despite learning so much over the years we have no idea how hard AGI is going to be. As of right now, the correct answer to how far away is AGI can only be I don’t know.
The absurdity of cow tools makes it pretty funny if you have no idea what the reasoning behind it is. A lot of the comics are just absurdist humor too, so the funny is that the situation is absurd.
Given the type of people that we are targeting here I think that helium blow-up dolls are are a bit of a waste, especially considering the scale that we would need to perform this on to actually make it somewhat believable. Better would be to use hydrogen, its soo much cheaper than helium, has better lift, and is not a limited resource. Along with that a custom order of human shaped and roughly human colored (with painted on clothes patterns) balloons would work better. Likely a lot cheaper if done at larger scales, blow up dolls are made of tougher material than your average balloon. This would also allow for the pursuit of more sustainable materials given that we are just sort of releasing this stuff into the sky.
There is also a matter of making it realistic. If we are limiting to maybe one city then its best to create some devices that automatically release them on timed schedules. load these up with a handful of people balloons each and let them release with increasing frequency throughout the day. Should be a bit more convincing and gets a bigger effect. For cleanup we already filled these guys with hydrogen, so why not just light them up. might make for a good effect and leave less waste to be examined, making it more difficult to prove that this is not a rapture event.
The feature is often not very well advertised, a pair of bt nc headphone I am looking at seem to not list it prominently despite being, imo, a pretty important feature. Searching by letter might not get you any accurate idea of what does and does not support multipoint.
Bought a pair from Zenni some 3 years ago for literally pennies (15$ for the frames, 10 for lenses). I have since carelessly snapped them (but keep elongating their lifespan unnaturally with super glue). Gonna buy my next pair from Zenni. I swear by them now for how cheap and durable these are, rarely had a pair of glasses survive 2 years before, and these were so much cheaper.
They also have regular people levels of quality, but I’m poor so it’s nice they have shit for people like me too.
You should read a bit more on how LLMs work, as it really helps to know what the limitations of the tech are. But yeah, it’s good when it’s good but a lot of the time it is inconsistent. It is also confident but sometimes just confidently wrong, something that people have taken to call “hallucinations”. Overall it is a great tool if you can easily check it and are just using it to write up your own code writing, but pretty bad at actually generating fully complete code.
If you don’t hate a programming language you simply haven’t used it enough or are delusional. Every language sucks in its own special way, js ain’t special.
A given programming language often has limitations which are largely different than the limitations from others. This means that different languages are often used on different kinds of problems. Want something fast, use C. Want to write something quickly, use python. Want it to run on just about anything, use Java. And so on.
So why don’t we make one ultimate one or a few that fulfill all needs? Well, partially because we haven’t figured out how to do that, but also it’s really easy to learn yet another language once your understand how they work. I can write in python, js, c, c++, c#, Java, kotlin, rust, perl, ruby, php, forth, lisp, and I could keep on going for quite a while. The underlying concepts are largely the same and so picking up a new language is no big deal (though being good at it is a bigger deal). We have so many because ultimately it just doesn’t really matter that we have so many.
I figured he specifically practiced to show that his high IQ score is not indicative of what his actual intelligence is. Like he intentionally inflated it with studying because otherwise whatever score he did get would be a brag, but after studying any score can be attributed (at least in part) to the studying (and motivation and all the other stuff) so isn’t really a brag about his intelligence, but a brag about the fact that he studied. Which isn’t really a brag at all.
Python is the connective tissue holding together library calls and some of our most advanced AI research is reliant on that. mildly concerning
To be honest, I too headed straight for the comments without reading the article. But I didn’t comment till I read it. It’s also not technically a crab either, despite being called one.
Idk about anyone else but its a bit long. Up to q10 i took it seriously and actually looked for ai gen artifacts (and got all of them up to 10 correct) and then I just sorta winged it and guessed and got like 50% of them right. OP if you are going to use this data anywhere I would first recommend getting all of your sources together as some of those did not have a good source, but also maybe watch out for people doing what I did and getting tired of the task and just wanting to see how well i did on the part i tried. I got like 15/20
For anyone wanting to get good at seeing the tells, focus on discontinuities across edges: the number or intensity of wrinkles across the edge of eyeglasses, the positioning of a railing behind a subject (especially if there is a corner hidden from view, you can imagine where it is, the image gen cannot). Another tell is looking for a noisy mess where you expect noisy but organized: cross-hatching trips it up especially in boundary cases where two hatches meet, when two trees or other organic looking things meet together, or other lines that have a very specific way of resolving when meeting. Finally look for real life objects that are slightly out of proportion, these things are trained on drawn images, and photos, and everything else and thus cross those influences a lot more than a human artist might. The eyes on the lego figures gave it away though that one also exhibits the discontinuity across edges with the woman’s scarf.