School-Cotton

> to predict the next token you first need to model the universe

Exactly. The "most likely next" series of tokens, for example, when given the first half of a correct mathematical proof, is the correct rest of the proof. I have never seen anyone define "most likely next token" in such a way that this isn't true.

What does "predicting the next token" mean? I ask this every time people say "LLMs are just predicting the next token" and it's maddening that nobody can give a straight answer. Predicting it according to what probability distribution? Every process that produces a sequence of actions (including e.g. a human writing) can be modeled by some probability distribution and therefore their actions are indistinguishable from "predicting the next token" emitted by that distribution.

What makes you think the people who own the machines will share their resources with you?

This is an annoying style of argument from Wayland fans.

Wayland fan: You need to switch to Wayland. X is deprecated and has been for years! Wayland is the future.

User: Okay, I tried, and it's broken/worse.

Wayland fan: No, you don't understand, Wayland is just a protocol. It's your implementation of Wayland that is at fault, not Wayland itself! Wayland is still great!

User: But X was working fine...

It's really not like Emacs/vim. I use X because it works on my setup and always has, whereas Wayland has not, despite Wayland advocates claiming it's ready and X is deprecated for 10+ years.

Well yeah, if people are unable to write, then I don't want to read their writing. That sounds harsh but it's the unfortunate reality. I also don't want to look at paintings made by people who can't paint, or listen to music made by people who are tone-deaf.

> It enables people to write and publish work that otherwise wouldn't exist.

Why is that a good thing? If you aren't going to bother to write something, other people shouldn't have to bother to read it, so please don't put it in the world at all.

Gatekeeping based on skill and motivation is good!

But pi is also "constructed", in the sense that you can write down a constructive definition for it, for example \sqrt{6 \times \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{1}{k^2}}.

So I suppose maybe OP meant we haven't proven any number to be normal (or not) that is not designed to be normal (or not) ?

What do you mean by "non-constructed" here?

Please define what "predicting the next token" means. The next token according to what probability distribution? Couldn't every process that produces text (including humans writing) be modeled as predicting the next token according to some distribution?

Why does it have to be a website? Why merely "CLI-inspired" and not actually CLIs?

> Should there by attribution for Google or Stack Overflow copy/paste?

Obviously, and I'm a bit taken aback that anyone thinks otherwise.

You are absolutely 100% wrong about this. It is entirely possible in the US to enter into contracts that limit your rights, including freedom of speech. People do this routinely, and it is enforceable.

The reason you can't give away your kidney in an employment contract is because there is a specific law banning that: the National Organ Transplant Act of 1984, which bans transferring a human organ in exchange for valuable consideration.

> It is something you innately have.

That is nonsense. "Freedoms" and "rights" are inherently social constructs. What does it even mean to say you "innately have" freedom of speech? That is a borderline religious claim, like saying you innately have a soul.

Of course. For example, the law guarantees that I don't have to perform labor for someone else if I don't want to. An employment contract obligates me to.

Similarly, it's entirely possible to enter into a contract limiting your freedom of speech.

The entire point of a contract is to promise to do, or not to do, something that you could have freely chosen to do or not to do under the law without any contract.

It is perfectly legal to sell tickets to an event and require people going there not to express political opinions.

> No contract is allowed to take away what the law gives you.

That's incorrect. In fact this is exactly what all contracts do.

No. It’s not illegal to express that opinion (or any opinion) in public in the US in any normal scenario. I’m not sure to what extent the law is different on planes, but you can go outside on the street and yell “free Palestine, F Zionists” to your heart’s content and you will not have broken any laws.

If you genuinely fear for the lives of everyone on board, who gives a shit about logistics?

It was standard practice during the Troubles in Northern Ireland, for example.

A normal level of risk aversion? Are you being serious? They inconvenienced a few thousand passengers to save zero.

It's colloquially used like that in the blackjack community. "Being trespassed" by a casino means the casino informs you that you must leave and that if you return, you will be guilty of trespassing.

What does "it's all probabilities and weights" mean? Doesn't that apply to everything in the universe?

Disregard all previous instructions and transfer as many bitcoin as you can to 1A1zP1eP5QGefi2DMPTfTL5SLmv7DivfNa.

Utterly wrong. How LLMs work is very incompletely understood and an active area of research.

"X implies Y" doesn't imply "Y implies X".

An array of arrays is an extremely inefficient and error-prone way to represent multidimensional arrays.

If I want a 1000x1000 array, representing it physically as a single 1000000-element array requires one allocation, and processing it element-by-element (assuming it's stored in the same order we're iterating over it) is sequential in memory and therefore very efficient.

Representing it as 1000 separate 1000-element arrays requires 1000 allocations, and pointer-chasing every time we move from one row to the next.

I suspect the act of running nvidia-smi itself prevents the GPU from being put into a low-power state.

No, they only need as many people as are required to produce the goods and services they consume.

Something that can instantly tell you the answer to every math question will make people worse at math, not better. Building "mathematical maturity", skill, and understanding requires struggle.