5 ms·
The human mind cannot comprehend the capacity of massively multidimensional space. Just going from 2D to 3D creates massive new positional potential (e.g. surf
by profsummergig 1mo ago
The human mind cannot comprehend the capacity of massively multidimensional space.
Just going from 2D to 3D creates massive new positional potential (e.g. surface of the earth, vs. the atmosphere above earth...).
Now imagine 1,000 dimensions.
- qsera 1mo ago>The human mind cannot comprehend the capacity of massively multidimensional space. That is why the scam works, because investors are humans...
- left-struck 1mo agoWhich scam sorry?
- qsera 1mo agoThe scam that is based on the implicit claim that LLM is a path to AGI. Seeing LLMs for what they really are will also make it clear they are fundamentally unfit for a lot of tasks they are currently marketed for...
- kleiba2 1mo agoToo broad a statement, and without substantiation, to be taken serious, sorry.
- sublinear 1mo agoToo shallow of a dismissal, and you don't determine what everyone else takes seriously. It's been several years now of LLMs only appeasing those with low expectations and inexperience. Unless the only goal was generating boilerplate or really sloppy proofs of concept, LLMs are a waste time for everyone else. This argument is so over already. We're all just hoping for a soft landing when the hangover really kicks in.
- pineaux 1mo agoWhat about the mathematical advancements?
- sublinear 1mo agoDoesn't that say more about the massive crumb tray nobody ever bothered to empty at the bottom of mathematics? I'm sure someone will point out something like the 4-color theorem as a counterargument. Where is that kind of theorem proving in this generation of AI? We seem to have hit a dead end rather quickly.
- brabel 1mo agoYou are disconnected from reality. The whole industry is already completely dominated by LLMs generating code. Bury your head in the sand all you want. This is not about low expectations or inexperience at all. Your condescending tone doesn't make you look smarter, it makes you look like an Amish who expects the industrial revolution is temporary and soon people will come to their senses and stop using all this nonsense industrial technology.
- 1mo ago
- Madmallard 1mo agoIs it? They're borderline useless and certainly potentially inadvertently malicious for writing, customer service, speech to text, writing large amounts of complex code, therapy, medical diagnostics... the list goes on Sounds like you're part of the problem? It's really a serious problem just eroding the fabric of society in real-time. Being complacent in it or believing in the promise is just wholly foolish and bad for everyone.
- hliyan 1mo agoThis is nonsense. The human mind cannot visualize more than 3 dimensions. It can perfectly comprehend any number of dimensions as long as they are represented in a vector space. In fact, that's what linear algebra does.
- sublinear 1mo agoYes. It's worth pointing out that anything with n distinct parameters is just a point in n-dimensional space. We're so used to handling so many dimensions that nobody ever bats an eye until someone brings up the magic word "dimensions". It's quite intuitive actually. The trivial example that comes to mind is the character customization sliders in many video games.
- gfody 1mo agoI think the human mind can visualize anything, eg here are some visual descriptions of higher dimensional objects: https://gfody.substack.com/p/mini-hyper-golf https://gfody.substack.com/p/mini-hyper-golf
- Lerc 1mo agoMy aphantasia says your milage may vary on that. On the other hand I deal with higher dimensions better than most, possibly because of my aphantasia.
- NitpickLawyer 1mo agoI think you accidentally a word, there. GP is talking about comprehending the capacity of massively multi-dimensional space.
- darig 1mo ago[dead]
- profsummergig 1mo agoCorrect. I implied nothing about visualizing. I was talking about (information) capacity.
- larodi 1mo agoImagine a box of balls. They have size, weight, colour, density… etc. These properties, each a measure, are dimensions and they are orthogonal to each other. Taken together are multi-dimensional.
- qsera 1mo agoNow take a set of words. They have "sizeness", "weightness", "colorness" and "densityness"...and "pythonness" and "haskellness" and even "adjectiveness" and "verbness" and so on and so forth...You can readily see that this can encode arbitrary patters (like language grammer or program syntax) Training identifies these dimensions in the training data and links it with each word/token. Then given a stream of such tokens, each with its own set of dimensions (which can be huge), and LLM predicts the dimensions that the next token is most likely to have...
- larodi 1mo agomy take from all these is that is perhaps possible to teach similarity search to 5th graders. not an elementary teacher myself, but many math concepts are much easier to explain with allegories (visual and other) than with formalism. a good example perhaps is what Mamikon does in his visual explanations of calculus (https://calteches.library.caltech.edu/4007/1/Calculus.pdf https://calteches.library.caltech.edu/4007/1/Calculus.pdf) formalisms come only after there is understanding of the phenomena and a specific need to communicate concepts across members of community - in a concise and commonly comprehensive way. my understanding is that education often fails to train understanding and jumps directly to formalisms. and this is right also for STEM schools, where it is presumed everyone has some innate inclination to the matter. but this presumption, in my experience as university teacher, is not entirely correct, and students are not universally prepared to express lack of understanding, and particularly when it is expected from them to rather indicate understanding. it seems very weird, the concept, to reward the correct answer, while suppressing and discouraging the expression of misunderstanding or confusion. why is weird? because learning comes trough trial and error, and the error part is half of it. so we need to encourage people to express their errors or lack of understanding, so that we can then fill in the gaps and eventually stand on a common ground. sadly, many forums, HN included, does not cherish misunderstanding. our posts here mostly get upvoted whenever they cross a sort of threshold about the amount of truth in our writing, and not because of daring expressions of confusion.