I have lived outside the uk now for the majority of the years of I have been able to drive.
The winner was a foregone conclusion, transport signage everywhere else I’ve lived and driven extensively other than the uk is a patchwork mess that has clearly had exactly no thought put into it.
It seems to me that the only realistic option is to have more exams, closed book, and then use gen ai yourself to help reduce the workload of grading. Possibly with some kind of curve assigning more weight later in the semester.
That’s not even true though, leadership is coordination, even if you trust someone else to do the right thing wrt their own problems that still may be globally suboptimal wrt the goals of the overall team / project.
I’m not disagreeing with your preference for human authored writing, but I don’t know that I agree with the content of your argument.
If you consider that what humans are doing during conversation is a form of compressed encoding / decoding from some latent representation through a quantized signal then if you interpret it that as a compressed sensing problem you absolutely can infer to a very close approximation the original latent representation using far fewer than those 1k bits.
I don’t think the bauhaus one is horrible, nor is the cubist one. They’re not great works of art, but if I saw one out in the wild, my reaction would not be: “bloody ai art making everything visually putrid again” nor, do I think they’re worse than the clip art and badly taken digital photograph agglomerations they would be replacing.
> Everything therefore becomes a hobby or a game. People do things because they enjoy them for their own sake, or because they are endeavours used as vehicles to socialise and enjoy others’ company, or because a shared social belief exists and is cultivated such that doing such and such a thing confers social status.
There is actually a big leap in logic you’re doing here that it seems you are naive to. The world looks the way it does today because human societies, businesses and individuals are fundamentally in competition with one another for scarce resources, and having more resources leads to more capacity to survive, so there is always an incentive to acquire more. If you can no longer compete, you can and will be exploited. You don’t have to look very hard, far or back in time to realize that this is what society looks like. If everyone is incapable of competing except those who can afford to run a datacenter, that will not end up in socialist utopia.
Quantization is a category error, the thing you care about is not in weight space, so there’s unbounded error introduced by doing it. The thing you actually want to preserve is the knowledge manifold, but that is in a different vector space. Until we have some better understanding of how to interact with that space directly, rather than inferring it through distillation of reasoning traces, I would not anticipate truly low bit models to be useful.
That seems like a pointedly naive viewpoint. You can have clearly predictive population level statistics about prevalence in family groups without clearly understanding the (very messy and unbelievably complicated) way that genetics shapes brain development.
I’m in two minds about this, in some sense they did and it’s the same way in which the C code I write is mine, but the assembly underneath is an artifact of my intent, but I owe the compiler authors for it. On the other hand the cognitive distance between my C and the assembly is likely lower, but that’s because I’ve spent time staring at what was generated in order to figure out why my code was misbehaving. Which is itself not that dissimilar to figuring out how to get better at writing code with llms.
There’s multiple databases of games in algebraic notation. You can also, very easily rl train on pitting models against one another, even without mcts.
using a 23mm auto cannon on orbit is more or less useless. There’s no way to reasonably shoot something when your relative velocities could easily be strictly greater than the bullets. Even if something is coming straight towards you it’s very difficult to aim when you have to take into account orbital mechanics. You would need a huge amount of RCS fuel in order to counteract the impulse from the gun. And even if you did shoot the gun if you miss, you now have a bunch of bullets that share your orbit and will at some point intercept your flight path again, if you don’t miss, you still have shrapnel sharing your orbital path.
Seems naive to think that those providers - who have a financial interest in selling the data - would not also try to weasel out of the precise definition of ‘zero’ retention.
I don’t agree with this. The things people care about with code quality if you really think about it actually match up surprisingly well with the metric which models are trained to emulate in pre training, namely compression and modularity. Those two ideas actually seem to be universal to intelligent systems. Writing verbose highly coupled code is I think provably stupid, though I don’t know that I could formalize it.
Sure, but unless you’ve got some exceptionally deep pockets, congress has seemingly no interest in turning the fact that it’s ethically bankrupt into any practical recourse.
Ai companies got where they are by stealing all of the intellectual property from human history. It seems entirely likely that their goal is to purloin everything produced going forward as well.
Hf’s python / transformers is a hot mess. It conflates so many different ideas into huge monoliths that it’s barely usable for anything other than the small snippets listed for trying out models.
They need to take a machete to all the cross coupling they’ve metastasized.
What a disgusting mess. Hopefully at some point people will be willing to listen to arguments in the vein of: “we spent $x dollars writing y loc that was then reviewed using z hours that did nothing, added no revenue and we then spent w additional budget removing it”
I would argue, that the null hypothesis is that it is not, and that anyone claiming that there is a mote of consciousness are the ones with the burden of proof.
Presumably the intended outcome would be that sites would be pressured into not being malignant actors with regards to user privacy, rather than everyone just ignoring the security notice.