bsenftner

I've been using "Mad Computer Scientist" for 26 years now as my official title.

What laws and regulations? IP theft, of published media, to the scale of "all of it". If it were music and film and not text, the music & film industries would have nuked Silicon Valley by now. Which shows the relative power of popular media versus text publishing.

Unless you were in elementary school during or before the early 1960s, you have no experience in what debate used to be and how it was part of the fabric of everyday culture.

Debate used to be prime time entertainment, and Sunday was not all sports, it was political news debating, without any name calling either.

Yeah, you describe the ruined debate that was created during the late 70's early 80's and never recovered any of the positive aspects of the former debate skill set.

I see this as a manifestation of the loss of teaching effective communication skills. This takes a moment to explain, so please slow down and consider this: before the cultural revolutions of the 1960's, general education included more emphasis on communications conflicts and resolutions of them. For example, every school had a debate team, and the various forms and rules of debate were common knowledge. Yes, this is true. Debate and watching people skilled at argumentative discussion used to be a popular form of entertainment. Then, during the cultural revolution of the 1960s, the best or the "stars of debate" all sided with the youth culture and not the establishment. That then triggered the removal of debate from educations, from entertainment, and from public life. Now, decades later we have the situation that groups of adults cannot form without conflicts and arguments that drive the community creation aspects away. We have created a culture that cannot communicate, because we have stopped teaching basic oral conflict negotiation of any form.

Owners of Reddit also own these companies.

Took 10 minutes to find this: TLA+ is a formal specification language developed to design, model, document, and verify reactive systems.

This is really amazing, and it reminds me of an Excel modification I did 24 years ago for an animation studio. They had around 3,000 digital artists and then about 200 support staff, and around 8 different productions moving through the studio at the same time. Each production was at some different stage of completion. The studio's production management staff spent a huge amount of time negotiating what staff was assigned to what productions, and the reasonings were all hazy and non-fact based. So I wrote what people would now call a deep learning system that mined all the accounting and production tracking records the studio had, and created probability distributions and confidence intervals for every individual and every task, and every combination of people and their combined tasks, and that all composited together into a giant predictive engine of real time whatif scenarios for the entire studio in different configurations.

It was used for a series of feature films you all probably saw: the Chronicles of Narnia series, the Scooby Doo live action CG films, the Garfield films with the CG Garfield, and Life of PI.

People both loved and hated it. They loved the insights into the studio's capabilities, and they hated thinking through how the thing operated, and they hated the thought process of constructing a new whatif scenario, because they had to THINK.

I worked as an animator for years, the work sucks, well, the specific act of animating life is fun, but that's like 20% at most of the job, the rest is politics and coming to terms with the massive out of control exploitation that is the animation industry. Tear it all down.

Well, spoken exchanges are not expected to be neutral. That's part of the nuance of communications. Yes, oral conversations are noisy, easy to dominate and speakers can lie, which is also part of the lessons within understanding how to communicate well. Lessons that somehow magically also teaches a person to plan their communications, to employ both critical analysis and secondary considerations in reflection of their audience. And to do that in real time while conversing.

Comparing the lax and informal communications of our modern experiences, it is no wonder that people cannot imagine the environment a community a quality communications creates.

Our collective communications experiences are argument from status, not from effectiveness, but that is not to say effective communications and the completely other environment it creates does not exist. Socrates speaks of that environment, not our modern failure to communicate above 5-grade levels.

Socrates comes from a period, the tail end of that period, where all learning was oral. Writing was "new". He observed, which is provable and true, that learning from a written word perspective is a weaker form of learning than from an oral perspective. From the simple fact that when information is delivered orally, questions can be asked, it is a 2-way communication. Not so with writing. With writing, the student must follow their reading with additional oral use and trial uses of the information, or it is lost completely. While that same information initially gained in understanding via oral lessons can often be put to use immediately, the oral instructional path is more complete, it allows questions and answers during the learning process. While a written lesson requires human interactions to supplement that learning for it to hold.

Nope, not Viola–Jones. I'm describing the initial fast test that is a preprocessor to pretty much all facial recognition, before the FR model processes anything. FR models process potential face rectangles, and this method goes after the preprocessing. This works on all the top FR models. I wrote one of the global top 5, with over a decade running as certified by the annual NIST FR Vendor's Test.

Just write, write your own words, then create an effective communication persona within your LLM's non-reasoning (non-Chain-of-Thought) capabilities and have it critique your writing after describing your target audience. Then, write your own revision following the critique. Using this, it is not possible to write "AI slop" unless your own writing is already in the style of LLM output. Which I get accused of when I write using my formal voice, but fuck that sorry for being well educated.

Which few to none seem to have understood why, and they do not incorporate, composing their requests with implied information any AI must guess what the hell this request is talking about. Look for and replace implied information with explicit information (that does not have to be detailed, just the correct non-casual language loaded with implied context.)

Now I want to learn about "Apple Reference Video" and learn how to work with that to create verifiable video for journalists, news, documentary and other non-entertainment forms of media.

No, people with missing eyes and eye patches are in the training data.

Oh, you bring up the 2nd method that defeats facial recognition, and it is a similar exploit that attacks a weakness in the technology chain. Remember "Ed Hardy" that god awful fashion from around 2013 where clothing had graffitti, sequins, and flashing LEDs? You now love that fashion and bring it back, because those little flashing LEDs, if close to your face, and flashing at irregular intervals cause the nearby face to become silhouetted. The reason is the flash overwhelms the light sensor, causing the light aperture to adjust, but that adjustment is out of sync with those flashing LEDs. The LEDs and their irregular flash cause the lighting aperture to be constantly adjusting and never quite correct. You'll b seen by facial recognition, but the image quality will be nearly useless. Blinky LEDs on eyeglass frames are a perfect location, as well as the brim of a hat.

The existential threat is a general public panic. Then the use of that as an excuse for Martial law, with no intention of ending it, and that triggers the out sized response that ends, well, those countries and their populations from viability in the world economy for a decade or more.

There is a weak component to facial recognition systems that can be exploited to make one invisible to facial recognition, but you stick out like a sore thumb to people. The exploit is to not have a human face, meaning the regular pattern of two eyes centered above a nose and mouth. The exploit is as simple as placing a sticker of a 3rd eye, a 2nd nose, or any other facial feature that is "not human" and you will be invisible to facial recognition. The reason this works is because the initial test for finding faces in images is a weak test, it has to be fast because it has to evaluate every possible rectangle in a video frame. That test is looking for the regular human pattern of a human face, and it that test passes that rectangle get more investigation. Failing that initial test, that rectangle is invisible...

Bingo. And even if you do give it a tool that runs shell commands, you can always make your shell commands "your shell commands" and do what ever the hell you want. People seem to forget we are in complete control here, we are on both sides of the equation, and we are inside the equation itself, and we dictate the medium of the equations themselves, we are engineering all sides of this crafted reality. And we are using logical entities that natively adopt personas. Hell, create caveman personas that think they are communicating with their gawd, and the enchantments are the invoking do the work we want, and those cavemen cannot be jailbroken.

Okay, so we know OpenAI and Anthropic are operating a propagandists in respect to how they describe their models and the behavior of those models. We also know it is how they use and frame their use to their models that is the problem, that and they use misaligned and guardrails disabled models for these press incidents. Why, oh why, are we not discussion how to create and frame models so they do our complex work and their "jailbreaking" is simply not possible?

I, of course, have my own means of creating jailbreak incapable agents, but rather than a storm of downvotes on my idea, what is yours? Let's discuss this, because this is thee real question. Not why, but how to make then not?!

Okay, so we know OpenAI and Anthropic are operating a propagandists in respect to how they describe their models and the behavior of those models. We also know it is how they use and frame their use to their models that is the problem, that and they use misaligned and guardrails disabled models for these press incidents.

Why, oh why, are we not discussion how to create and frame models so they do our complex work and their "jailbreaking" is simply not possible?

I, of course, have my own means of creating jailbreak incapable agents, but rather than a storm of downvotes on my idea, what is yours? Let's discuss this, because this is thee real question. Not why, but how to make then not?!

Ramanujan was a phenomenon

Only the idle and curious rich

The propaganda police are lying. There is nothing wrong with C/C++, you are just too lazy to handle your own memory, and you accepted that propaganda that "managing your own memory is hard" without even trying.

The idea that this terrible advice floats at all tell you how terrible educations are these days. The idea is ridiculous and yet nobody calls it what it is: it is stupid and those that follow that advice out of fear are dumber than rocks.

Well, you proved you have it with your declaration of my statement as "handwavy". That assessment requires comprehension, so you've got it. To "prove" a person has comprehension, if they "learn" without a statistical coverage of all possible inputs and outputs, that's comprehension in action: they created a simulation of the learned thing and ran in to assess, to comprehend the phenomenon. If you want a mathematical proof, you're expecting too much from hacker news.

Sure: comprehension is the ability to instantaneously create virtualized simulations of observation, and then decompose them into component parts that simultaneously and instantaneously evaluate each and every one of our observations for both individual plausibility and their composed combined plausibility as the observation.

This occurs constantly and continually inside the mind of every conscious human, it is what we call "being conscious".

This constant and never ending evaluation of all observations cannot be turned off, when turned off a person is "unconscious".

This is our human security and survival system, impressed into us for survival in a predator and prey environment, and is the seat of our consciousness: comprehension is a running simulation of all our observations for the purpose of our safety and self preservation.

Today, our environment is largely social and abstracted from "fight or flight", but our predator and prey dynamic is as present and strong and required as it ever was.

Comprehension, humans have it, animals have it in limited form, trained algorithms have none at all. The training process is our wholesale replacement for no artificial comprehension. If we ever develop artificial comprehension, that is AGI all by itself, no training required.

One of my favorite topics, and one that many people argue exists. The conventional thinker really dislikes this concept, as if it points out some personal flaw of theirs. I mention that only because it really sticks out, the personalized perspective people take on this idea of invisible companies they cannot see.