24 karma · joined June 20, 2023
In the context of the game described in the post, the main variable we were concerned about was u_x, because we scaled difficulty by increasing it over time. This in fact results in flatter parabolas, so I actually had quite the opposite concern of what you outlined and might have over-optimized in that direction!
Thanks for taking the time to read and try out what's described in the post. It's my first time working on a technical blog, and I'm extremely grateful for any constructive feedback / criticism :)
I'm not really interested in changing my information diet to help me follow the news, but I feel like I'm missing out on the high-quality and original writing that I'm sure must exist _somewhere_ in much larger quantities than I can find through my current sources, and that there must be a way to easily aggregate them all so that I don't miss out on the sources that publish less frequently.
https://homelessness.ucsf.edu/blog/vacancies-are-red-herring
That said, I do think this movie missed out on a lot of potential, by not exploring what the actual significance of the Beatles to the world would have been: it never really asks what the world would be like had the Beatles never existed, which I think is a really interesting question, and instead develop a typical Hollywood plot.
[1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2312.11514
[2] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2404.14619 (with 1.1B parameters, this appears to be their attempt at building a lightweight LLM)
> If, on the Llama 2 version release date, the monthly active users of the products or services made available by or for Licensee, or Licensee’s affiliates, is greater than 700 million monthly active users in the preceding calendar month, you must request a license from Meta, which Meta may grant to you in its sole discretion, and you are not authorized to exercise any of the rights under this Agreement unless or until Meta otherwise expressly grants you such rights.
There is probably a need for an alternative term to describe these kinds of models, because they're not exactly open-source in the traditional sense
What is happening is a noticeable decline in the levels of trust in education and science. Generally, in the rich world, education used to be assumed to be a necessarily good allocation of resources, and whether you accessed it or not was largely a function of your wealth. Now, in some pockets of the world, this is no longer true.
I also think that space travel will only see a revival in public interest if it provides viable economic value or becomes a renewed front for competing nationalism, neither of which appear to be extremely likely in the short term. Up to that point, I think it'll continue to be a playground for billionaires.
Also, the LK-99 example is an exception, not the norm–the chances of receiving significant attention for a replication study are near zero in almost all other cases.
OP might have a point: if OpenAI declines, devs might prefer the Azure API over the OpenAI API for factors like stability, quality, response time, better integration with existing Azure stack, etc.
_"Point out incorrect assumptions or statements in the above answer."_
I got the idea from Khan Academy's [implementation](https://youtu.be/A7REVn9gzgs?t=1208) of GPT-4, where they allow it to 'think' by generating an internal response first, before generating a final response. This apparently improved the veracity of its output by a significant margin.
If ChatGPT doesn't double down on its original answer, then I know definitely not to trust it.
This doesn't solve the underlying problem, because it doesn't ultimately correct the error in a reliable way, but it does help me avoid some of the more obviously garbage output.
Source: Am a high school programmer