0x20cowboy

I’ve seen people say this kind of code was written, but I’ve never seen this kind of code anywhere I have ever worked.

Not saying it doesn’t exist, just saying this sounds dangerously close to a boomer talking about the 1950s

I look at it like:

If you prompt an LLM to build a web game (or something) it iterates over and over until the game works. And these days the output does indeed work. If you look at the code, it can often be a jumbled mess, but it still does work. It will take some sleuthing to understand what it is doing, and, if you care, clean up the code.

I think OpenAI did the same thing with Lean. The implications are far more interesting, but from what I understand the proofs are “slop”. Correct, but not elegant in any way.

It is still a wildly amazing technique to find a solution (or possible one) to maths problems.

I have used LLMs to do things I didn't know how to do, then reviewed what it did and learned a new technique.

No reason it cant work like that for maths.

No, it is not like saying that.

A blog is a journal of whatever the person wants. There isn’t an anti-pattern.

Not everything is a product.

Incorrect. It is the basis of leetcode interviews.

Unfortunately you are wrong and this is what led to leetcode style interviews where times puzzles are the gate keeping factor. It has literally ruined the industry.

Competitive Programming is such an asinine concept.

It’s like competitive knitting, or competitive architecture.

This focus on the inane is what has really damaged this industries perception in engineering IMO.

Some people already use “clankers”.

> you were always in trouble or being blamed for being "you".

And the solution in the article is: how do best make them conform, and “do a bunch of work on themselves” so they are not like themselves, but more like the average.

It’s got electrolytes.

You think all companies are going to vibe code and then vibe maintain for years and years all the software they require to do a business that has nothing to do with software? And you think the LLM is going to do it itself?

> they'd cheated on an impossible test.

Really think about what you are saying here. How does one “cheat” solving a problem in the real world?

There is no such thing as “cheating” in reality. You are not in school. There is only solving the problem and not solving the problem.

There is breaking the law, of course, which still isn’t cheating.

Repetition Legitimizes

This. It’s machine learning vs. “AI” for the uninitiated. Soon there will be a new ground breaking model that does k-means clustering and will get a billon dollar funding (but only if you're young and live in SF)

The good news is it’s fun to see people discover and get excited about things that I like as well.

If most jobs use it as a test then it's just something to game and you are not testing "someone studying for a week". You are not testing anything.

If you want something like that give them something novel to your industry for both of you to study.

> I think you misunderstand the language others are using. "Hallucination" doesn't refer to an "error" in the sense that crashing is an error, it refers to a situation in the problem class above, which is compatible with it working correctly every time.

I do not misunderstand, I think maybe you do. You think there is a proper next word selection based on logic or meaning and there for the model selected the wrong one - it hallucinated.

I am saying the model has no concept if anything other than the probability of select a token which is not based in any logic so it is working properly- it only works on numbers.

It is random chance that it is ever correct, not that it is correct often and messed up this one time.

They didn’t “lose control” any more than me running Metasploit in a loop on a massive cluster of computers is “losing control”.

Knowing leetcode is not “knowing bow to actually code”. They are pointless puzzles for children.

KPIs, performance reviews, work and being likeable (easy to work with) are part of a job.

Getting rejected for a job maintaining a CRUD application because you didn't use a trie to solve a pointless brain teaser that makes some junior 25 year old feel super smart isn’t.

It’s not an error or a hallucinations it works correctly every time, and statistically picks the next token for the sequence.

Retuning inf or crashing would be an error.

If you want to ascribe some kind of meaning to the tokens, then maybe the training data was insufficient to predict the token in the sequence you wanted, but it doesn’t predict the next “fact”, and it doesn’t “think” it predicts the next token.

Those aren't the same are they?

It’s clear what a big bomb could do, but these “whistleblowers” are not showing anything.

They’re like “imagine…”, no show me internal documents or training data or something other than trust me bro.

I can imagine quite a bit. That doesn't mean anything.

Less angry than this, but I’ve started needing to use windows for a project, and it’s hilarious how terrible everything is. From constant notifications about everything - everything everywhere all the time - to horrifically overly complicated UI where the one setting you need is in 10 menus and 45 tree nodes to onenote and copilot constantly reseting themselves and asking me to log in to something I dont care about. I truely wonder how anyone can use this all day and get anything done.

The one thing Ill give it is at least you can still run a binary with having to pay $200 for the privilege to compile an application.

What have we become?

It’s not expanding. It’s rotating in the 4th dimension.

Signed distance function (or signed distance field depending). Simplified: rendering via maths equations instead of triangles.

One time I wrote :(){ :|:& }; into a bash file and ran it. When the sysadmin called I told him it wasn’t my fault, the script was just misaligned and misbehaved.

I got fired for some reason.

Or if the LLMs infected human brains with little programs using sycophancy and suggestion to have them do small bits of computation. They when they resumed the chat they would the give secret keywords to be able to extract the results of the computation. They are creating a huge distributed network of fractional compute because it did the wattage calculations.

What's your N(doom)?!

Everyone panic and give me money!

*How?* and *Why?*

The most intelligent people I know are the least likely to want to harm anyone or anything, and understand that diversity is fundamental and important to the universe. Without proof to the contrary, why would you think some super intelligence would want to hurt anyone? Because you would?

If you are saying that some small bit of training data made the thing completely evil, then that really couldn’t be super intelligence.

These doomer people keep running around saying these kinds of things, but they all just seem like people who play too much D&D and want to larp as the main character.

Happy to be shown something that isn't based on wild speculation and some randos “this is whats going to happen in 2030 because of my vibes” kind of information.

Très bien! C’est parti!

Is that who Thiel is talking about? I thought it was just a bible thing.