mnewme

Sadly that is true

I wouldn‘t trust meta at all with my data.

Awesome

Do I miss something? But isnt there the whole code and paper of Kevin Buzzard in the training data of Claude?

Yes, eurohate is real. Don’t get why though

Well at least 10x better than in the US now

Well I think this it at least improvement to the status quo

The vast majority of HN users are from the US.

Not really Bold, yes GDP per capita is lower in many countries than the US, but top tier in almost every other index: low crime rates, clean cities, high quality of living, childfriendliness, longevity, access to healthcare, liveable cities, culture, etc.

Great read, though huggingface is French, not American

They are not incompetent in general. Most stuff works pretty well in Europe and better than in most of the world. We just focus on the bad regulations

Actually having worked in big companies,many of them just track everything, but don’t actually use the data, which is even worse.

Actually the purpose was not to invade our privacy as much, which we do and there is active lobbying (for example by Google) against any better solution: https://noyb.eu/en/eu-member-states-and-google-suddenly-want...

we could have settled on privacy compliant tracking without cookies, which is possible or use browser preferences and respect those (which would be perfectly legal)

It is not an EU law. Nowhere in GDPR are cookie banners mandated.

Actually big tech is to blame: https://killthecookiebanner.eu/

Actually cookies are not mandated by the EU, but this was the solution the big companies agreed on and now Google and Co try to lobby against better solutions.

Check out: https://killthecookiebanner.eu/

This is just horrible, these are humans that get treated like that

Of course, but there is also enough evidence. And you have yet to produce any logical, evidence-based argument that would counter that evidence

Not only, also about more extreme weather changes happen regularly and for example in Austria we had now the hottest sommer to be ever recorded.

Actually the reverse is true. I would encourage you to think more and actually read and understand what 99% of science says since 50 years and why so many people come to the same results

You should stop thinking about sides. There are no sides.

There are different opinions and facts

Thinking for yourself doesn’t mean rejecting science and 50 years of research in an area where there’s a rare 99% consensus among scientists (check: Lynas et al., Environmental Research Letters), just because some guys on social media said so.

Exactly! Politics try to appease the mass. If the mass would be willing to put climate change first we would have other policies, instead we follow the dark visions of lunatic billionaires

Sad to see how many climate sceptics are even on HN

Thank you Armin, Mario and team for the great writeup, absolutely agree and I love what you guys are building

Actually not quite true: Memory is distributed across synaptic weights rather than sitting at an address or location.

The difference is that human retrieval isn’t a read operation, reconsolidation means recalling a memory destabilizes it and re-stores an altered version. The act of remembering modifies the thing doing the remembering. An LLM’s weights don’t change when you put history in the prompt, and the prompt is discarded intact afterward. There is no state that would indicate any form of consciousness.

There is no form of subjective experience.

We used analogies from nature to describe computers and the same vocabulary and now because of this people now draw reverse conclusions that are not necessarily true

Yes there is no definitive proof, but the reverse is also not true. Please read some science on that in neurology and biology. Yes it is hard to define, though there are definitions and those are not fulfilled by a LLM, What’s missing is a bearer: no state persists between calls, nothing is maintained against pressure, nothing costs the system anything.

though more an more animals seems to be conscious as we previously thought

I recently read an article about a brain scientist that said how dangerous it is to use the same words for completely different things. We use human analogy to describe LLMs and then think LLMs exhibit human behaviour.

No reasoning has nothing to do with what we do. Humans can solve novel problems using sparse information. LLMs can’t do that.

Reasoning is a complex cognitive process that involves causal understanding, mental modeling, intentionality, and abstraction. Instead, transformer-based models statistically predict textual continuations based on patterns learned from extensive training data containing examples of human-written logical processes and problem decompositions.

LLMs produce outputs that superficially resemble human reasoning, but they are merely reproducing observed patterns rather than engaging in genuine cognitive reasoning.

Nope you can’t run an LLM continuously with one prompt, you are probably referring to agent harnesses, what in fact happens it sends additional prompts using a loop and asks in between if the goal is solved, for the LLM every request is completely new, you just add and add history to the prompt. no it is not real memory, an LLM doesn’t learn from each conversation, you just again add text to the prompt (which is history) up until the context window.

No but the guy has intent, has short term memory and has subjective experience, all which a LLM is lacking.

There is absolutely ZERO evidence or possibility that LLMs are currently conscious, everyone working in AI knows this, (and don’t listen to the marketing hypes).

LLMs still can’t reason (don’t confuse with the marketing word) , plan, or understand the world, no emotion, no subjective experience, no memory, no intent.

And yes I would change my opinion if it were logically different, other architectures may pave the way there, but not LLMs

Well at least the slug has intent.