cauliflower2718

Painting, too. Not sure how common or uncommon but my landlord explicitly allows painting, as long as it's not a dark color

ChatGPT lets you refuse to allow your content to be used for training (under Preferences -> Data controls), but Prism does not.

Regarding medical information: medical professionals in the US, including your doctor, use uptodate.com, which is basically a medical encyclopedia that is regularly updated by experts in their field. While it's very expensive to get a year long subscription, a week long subscription (for non medical professionals) is only around $20 and you can look up anything you want.

The original title is so much more informative. It might be so informative that many people didn't feel a need to read the article.

Thanks for your engagement but it would help if you read my comment the first two times.

You've personally demonstrated that humans don't have to be reasonable and cooperative, but you're not at all refuting my claim.

My example is asking for way less than what you're asking for.

Here is something I do not see with reasonable humans who are cooperative: Me: "hey friend with whom I have plans to get dinner, what are you thinking of eating?" Friend: "fried chicken?" Me: "I'm vegetarian" Friend: "steak?"

Note that this is in the context of four turns of a single conversation. I don't expect people to remember stuff across conversations or to change their habits or personalities.

Your goalpost is much further out there.

I think this depends on how you measure task.

One common kind of interaction I have with chatgpt (pro): 1. I ask for something 2. Chatgpt suggests something that doesn't actually fulfill my request 3. I tell it how its suggestion does not satisfy my request. 4. It gives me the same suggestion as before, or a similar suggestion with the same issue.

Chatgpt is pretty bad at "don't keep doing the thing I literally just asked you not to do" but most humans are pretty good at that, assuming they are reasonable and cooperative.

+1, I am also big user of PGMs, and also a big user of transformers, and I don't know what the parent comment talking about, beyond that for e.g. LLMs, sampling the next token can be thought of as sampling from a conditional distribution (of the next token, given previous tokens). However, this connection of using transformers to sample from conditional distributions is about autoregressive generation and training using next-token prediction loss, not about the transformer architecture itself, which mostly seems to be good because it is expressive and scalable (i.e. can be hardware-optimized).

Source: I am a PhD student, this is kinda my wheelhouse

I was wondering about this, because the link shows a bunch of birds in the "death zone".

What do you do for managing dependency / tolerance?

I think the author's line between pink and purple is also not very clear. For example, teen spirit appears in both.

This is so cute!! I hope you two are having a lovely life together.

It seems like all of the links to more of their work (e.g. "research on deterministic vs. probabilistic systems") are currently broken.

I've gotten an AI generated email back when I asked for support, which did seem to understand my request at a surface level, but was not actually helpful. That's the extent of support I've received from cursor.

This follows directly from the fact that exp(x+y)=exp(x)exp(y).

Agree -- especially if this was a post about something a real person thought of, but edited with AI (the author is in France, so it seems reasonable to use AI for editing; also it's a small blog that has been around for a while and not a content farm).

For some reason I think I would find it less valuable if the idea itself came from an AI, too.

In section "Works in every major city!", the author mentions they are from France.

Given that, it's not surprising that they used an AI to help with translation.

Is this to be interpreted as most men have two parents, and in adulthood one of them dies?

Or, men have a parent they are close with plus a spouse, and then the parent dies?

I think basic definitions for LLMs are solidly within the bounds of what we would expect e.g. chatgpt to be competent at. The task (defining terms) is simple and the specific content (basic LLM stuff) is easy to check by anyone who works on the LLM.

I agree with the general sentiment that we should not just blindly trust LLMs though.

You can ask an LLM exactly this question and it will tell you.

(The answer is billions of parameters)

There's a lazy way to submit to arxiv, which is to submit just the PDF, even if you did it in latex. Sometimes it can be annoying to organize the tex files to submit to arxiv. It's uncommon, but the font and math rendering are the standard latex font.

It looks like it's written in latex to me. Standard formatting varies across departments, and the author is in the business school at CMU.

In some fields, single author papers are more common. Also, outside of ML conference culture, the journal publication process can be pretty slow.

Based on the above (which is separate from an actual evaluation of the paper), there are no immediate red flags.

Source: I am a PhD student and read papers across stats/CS/OR.

"Sanity has nothing directly to do with the way you think. It’s a matter of presenting yourself as safe. Little old men wander around London hallucinating visibly, but no one gets upset. The same behaviour in a younger, more vigorous person would get him shut away. A Canadian study on attitudes to mental illness concluded that it was when someone’s behaviour was perceived as ‘unpredictable’ that the community rejected them. A fat lady was admiring a painting at a private view at the Tate when the artist strode over and bit her. They threw him out, but no one questioned his sanity—it was how he always behaved."

From Impro by Keith Johnstone

The machine has been getting easier to talk to over time. The machine also doesn't complain or get tired or sick.

I would be a little surprised if he gets discouraged and I would also really hope he doesn't. The author is a statistics professor at CMU, and everything of his that I've read, including his textbooks, are awesome and written with similar clarity to his blog post.

If 75% have diabetes (or don't have diabetes -- either way), then 75% accuracy is also the accuracy of a naive coin flip.

That is to say, don't compare to the accuracy of an even coin flip; compare to the accuracy of a coin flip that flips according to the proportion of the people with the attribute you care about.

The US has Capri sun juice pouches.

Just speculating about orange juice: vitamin C degrades easily when exposed to light, so that orange juice in clear containers lose more vitamin C than orange juice in opaque containers. That could be one reason against (clear) milk bags, but there are certainly clear bottles of orange juice sold, and I suppose you could use opaque juice bags, though those would be less user friendly than clear juice bags.

Edit: capri sun juice pouches!

Are there other examples that you particularly like?

Could you point us towards some of this excellent content and how you found it?