user_named

2023-eternity: if you have a job at a place that own LLM module ip you are rich.

The combination of high nominal prices and nornal-ish rates is what results in a high monthly outlay, that's what everyone is talking about. Affordability, not rates. At present prices, not 1990 prices.

There are several bets on that prediction markets site I forget the name of, about the reason for the firing.

It's possible that none of them will ever be closed because will we ever know the reason, and if it is told will it be credible?

Artwork is irrelevant. They can spend 5 minutes per month creating work. What's important is pr, branding, networking.

You're correct, it's just a point cloud. This version is just larger, with far higher resolution, since it's cheaper to train.

>The main issue is that the art world is allergic to the language these guys use, so they’ll likely attract not-so-good artists and may not be able to connect artists with the people who actually matter in the art world.

Exactly. No proper fine artist will be part of this because it would be embarrassing.

Have fun defining and proving AGI lol

Hilarious. The look on Ilyas face when these two show up at the office for their "sync", or perhaps he's ordered to travel to a location of the owner/client's choosing.

I wonder if they'll get bored working on Copilot in PowerPoint

Altman pulling an Elop

You could both say that this gives Sam less power over OpenAI, and more.

Yes, after they find success. If this is an incubator, it would be helping artists to grow their career and for that they need pr, not studio management.

Absolutely.

That model is far more applicable. Buy an artists works or set up a foundation and give grants. In the process it provides exposure that builds the artist's brand.

In terms of gaining success. Artists are chosen by galleries, media reporters based on their story, ie their brand, and how the could be represented to clients, readers. Is there anything interesting to be said or are they just another mfa graduate?

That's why you see the crazy antics of ie a urinal as an artwork, taping a banana to the wall, and the insane art writing that come with an artwork.

A piece of art is not bought for its craftsmanship or what it looks like. It is bought because of the story of the artist, the fact that other people know the artists story, so hanging it on your wall means something. It is part of culture. A Picasso is worth a lot because of its part of art history.

You cannot apply the logic of tech vc on cultural production.

Artists don't need studio management services. They need a profile in NYT. If you actually gave them a gallerist and a dedicated pro agent, then yeah that could launch some careers. But that would need to be non public information, because that type of manufacture goes against authenticity.

Art is nothing more than branding and social connections. Absolutely nothing more.

There's Swedish regional news every now and then of various types of sexual assault on minors by Arab and African gangs, and recently there was a story where they stomped on the father's head after he interfered.

LLMs only knows it's text embeddings. It does not know the real world. Clear?

You didn't answer my question ergo you concede that LLMs don't know true or false.

Yes, you don't understand what I said. The model has no concept of true or false. It only has embeddings. If 'asked' a question it can see if that is consistent with its embeddings and probabilities or not. This is not a representation of the real world, of facts, but simply a product of its training.

I thought that was pioneered in the paper that came out of Google?

Okay, so then tell me how does it decide whether it is true or false that Biden is the POTUS?

It's response is not based on facts about the world as it exists, but on the text data it has been trained on. As such, it is not able to determine true or false even if the response in the above example would be correct.

At every point in time there are a range of moves with different levels of optimality. That range changes at the next point in time following the opponent's move.

It's not planning ahead, it is looking at the probabilities of the tokens altogether rather than one by one.

We're not.

It is a very basic fact that LLMs have no concept of true or false, it only has an ability to look up what text data it has seen before. If you do not understand this you are in no position to discuss LLMs.

That discussion is based on the earlier version of the article which has a different headline. This is a new piece of information that is significant and should be surfaced.

No it is not a dupe, this is hidden in a different discussion

Never heard about this before. Sources?

You still don't get it. EU wants interoperable standards. Clear?