4 ms·
> that's not fixing the problem, that's mitigating the problem is there anything humanity ever "fixed" then? surely it's possible in principle to solve at leas
by anuramat 4mo ago
> that's not fixing the problem, that's mitigating the problem
is there anything humanity ever "fixed" then? surely it's possible in principle to solve at least some things that weren't solved yet
> approximation functions, not pure functions
how is approximation function not a pure function?
> non deterministic
you can set topk=1 or think in terms of distributions; still might have some undocumented non-determinism, hence "~pure"
> non-ideal
what do you mean?
> massive combinatorials
so you get to make arbitrary assumptions, but I'm supposed to limit myself to non-massive combibatorials?
> no api
ok, "domain and codomain", happy? I'm trying to optimize for probability of being understood and inverse smartass-ness
> learn the fundamentals
so you think I don't know the fundamentals because I didn't use category theory to talk about prompt injections?
- solid_fuel 4mo ago> so you think I don't know the fundamentals because I didn't use category theory to talk about prompt injections? You have made it abundantly clear that you don't know the fundamentals. If you want people to consider the arguments you put forth, you will need a better understanding of the problem domain. Go study, come back when you can contribute.