meroes

More!

Thank you. I was following along until that paragraph and got the opposite interpretation too.

If fent is a WMD then so are turbines!

There is a case for the two populations to be quite similar.

THC in the blood doesn’t mean actively high for habitual users, which would be most users if THC consumption is high. It means recent use, but not clear impairment.

They taught a summer class at Stanford where the capstone was putting your 3D model into Ut4 as a new character. Classroom of networked commuters with all kinds of popular games on them…it was hard to get work done some times.

OP is free to chose their metrics. I wouldn’t trade education for a home personally. I think it’s interesting how they chose their metrics.

You didn’t mention how many went to college

I’m totally sure you’d apply the same for unchecked corporate law breaking, right? Enforce the Hatch Act, go after wage theft which dwarfs any kind of retail or private theft, etc. If you think it’s about political power, you’d question prisons and detention centers being put in red states where they count political appropriation from the inmates and guards.

It’s one of the things I noticed in France and Italy. Like after a few days you notice the mens’ silhouettes are alien. Not in a bad way, but noticeable.

This all just boils down to the Chinese Room thought experiment, where Im pretty sure the consensus is nothing in the experiment (not the person inside, the whole emergent room, etc) understands Chinese like us.

Another example by Searle is a computer simulating digestion is not digesting like a stomach.

The people saying AI can’t form from LLMs are in the consensus side of the Chinese Room. The digestion simulator could tell us where every single atom is of a stomach digesting a meal, and it’s still not digestion. Only once the computer simulation breaks down food particles chemically and physically is it digestion. Only once an LLM received photons or has a physical capacity to receive photons is there anything like “seeing a night sky”.

Does this mean you think the collective datacenter mass of ChatGPT or something more emergent is AGI?

And I never took biology past sophomore year and yet I knew the first time I listened to Aubrey De Grey he was wrong to propose millennians (living to be 1,000+) had already been born (as of 2005).

Anyone have links for these:

> Yann LeCun was first, fully coming around to his own, very similar critique of LLMs by end of 2022.

> The Nobel Laureate and Google DeepMind CEO Sir Demis Hssabis sees it now, too.

Or when. Driving during peak commute hours really makes you a sardine in a box and it's harder for there to be intervene-worthy events just by nature of dense traffic.

That's the magic answer. It's a/the hard problem, but permeable to inquiry. The top neuroscience research into consciousness however doesn't seem like this kind of inquiry Dennett is referencing.

I like the more specific versions of those terms: the feeling of a toothache and the taste of mint. There's no need to grasp anything, they're feelings. There's no feeling when a metal bar is bent by a press.

Why they focus on feelings is a different issue.

More than half of STEM grads with careers don’t have a career in STEM.

Including techbros thinking they have to answer to every question humanity has ever asked?

Piracy gained two more pluses in the past few weeks: no age verification and no payment blockage.

It grew out of many different threads: different websites, communities, etc all around the same time. I noticed it contemporaneously in the philosophy world where Nick Bostrom’s Simulation argument was boosted more than it deserved (like everyone was just accepting it at the lay-level). Looking back I see it also developed from less wrong and other sites, but I was wondering what was going on with simulations taking over philosophy talk. Now I see how it all coalesced.

All of it has the appearance of sounding so smart, and a few sites were genuine. But it got taken over.

Yep. The big companies set the real qualifications when they hire. Schools are just preparing them for that, pretending otherwise with made up standards/exams is a misstep—the big companies prize connections.

Repeating the sufficient training data mantra even when there’s doctor-patient confidentiality and it’s not like X-rays which are much more amenable to training off than therapy notes, which are often handwritten or incomplete. Pretty bold!

This is scary because there have already been AI engineers saying and thinking LLMs are sentient, so what’s unreasonable could be a mass false-belief, fueled by hype. And if you ask a non-expert, they often think AI is vastly better than it really is, able to pull data out of thin air.

Meat and vegetables would make me sedentary from having inadequate glycogen for physical work and exercise.

How about: some pasta and bread to enable physical exertion.

Usually I get the loop, which runs me out of compute, and have to wait till tmrw. Glad there is actually a way to stop it from confidently “fixing” the same issue.

Not disagreeing but I think it's worth adding, "but you can outrun a slightly bad diet".

Uh no. I’m a math RLHF’er. When I get hired, I work on math/logic up to masters level because that’s my qualifications. Masters and PHD work on masters and PHD level. And IMO work on IMO math.

Every skill and skill level is specifically assigned and hired in the RLHF world.

Sometime the skill levels are fuzzier, but that’s usually very temporary.

And as been said already, IMO is a specific skill that even PHD math holders aren’t universally trained for.

Young women are also getting paid more than young men

It shows models need RL for any new domain/level of expertise, which is contrary to what the marketers claim about LLMs and potential for AGI.

There's no evidence this model works like that. The "axioms" for counting the number of r's in a word are magnitudes simpler than classical physic's, and yet it took a few years to get that right. It's always been context, not derivation of logic.