Al-Khwarizmi

7 ms·

91.
by Al-Khwarizmi 10mo ago
So, there are threats and the economic data is fine (like now) -> the free market works great because it works fine in spite of the threats. There are threats, the economic data falls into the gutter, but eventually recovers (not without
92.
by Al-Khwarizmi 10mo ago
I hate Trump, but this piece doesn't seem to prove or argue anything at all. It's basically free market fanaticism, it says that economic metrics are good in spite of protectionism and not because of it because how could it be oth
93.
by Al-Khwarizmi 10mo ago
I've never tried Pebbles but Huawei also has the same philosophy, mine has 2 weeks battery life and does all I need (which also doesn't include replacing the phone). I don't understand why people would buy watches with 1 or 2
94.
by Al-Khwarizmi 10mo ago
The Spanish president at the time, Aznar, also "fell for it" (probably didn't believe it but played along just for posturing, because he loved being pictured with Bush) and paid the price domestically. The best thing is that
95.
by Al-Khwarizmi 10mo ago
I spent years (maybe a decade) without seeing them in the Windows 7 and early 10 era, but in the last few years I have them sometimes. Many seem Nvidia-related, but I also remember some due to a bad update that broke things in some laptops.
96.
by Al-Khwarizmi 10mo ago
Contrary to the case for the internet, there is a way out, however - if local, open-source LLMs get good. I really hope they do, because enshittification does seem unavoidable if we depend on commercial offerings.
97.
by Al-Khwarizmi 10mo ago
And they have hardware as well, and their own cloud platform. In my view Google is uniquely well positioned because, contrary to the others, it controls most of the raw materials for Ai.
98.
by Al-Khwarizmi 10mo ago
When I was a kid in the 80s scooters weren't a thing in my country, I never saw one, but they did appear in the comics I read (from the 50s-60s). I remember asking my parents about them, and they telling me that they were toys from the
99.
by Al-Khwarizmi 10mo ago
> I assume uploading to arXiv doesn't count as having published a peer reviewed journal article, which is a problem for professionals. Yes, in fact this is mainly what I meant with "quality badge". It's a badge most
100.
by Al-Khwarizmi 10mo ago
Semantic Scholar is for search, but you can't just go there and look at everything that has been uploaded today as you do in arXiv, right? I know many people who check arXiv every day (myself included) but not Semantic Scholar, althoug
101.
by Al-Khwarizmi 10mo ago
> We haven't chosen quantity over quality, we have decided that journals should not be the arbiters of quality. In CS, this is definitely not the case at all. If you remove the "quality badge" factor, journals are totall
102.
by Al-Khwarizmi 10mo ago
In my field, arXiv (free preprint server) is actually much more discoverable than journals. It tends to be on top of Google searchers, many people (myself include) check it out daily, and few people even check journals (why would you check
103.
by Al-Khwarizmi 10mo ago
Ev Fedorenko is a highly recognized cognitive scientist that has been studying how humans parse language for years. Of course this doesn't mean one shouldn't question what she says (that would be an obvious authority fallacy), but
104.
by Al-Khwarizmi 10mo ago
The LLM is always operating as designed, but humans call its outputs "hallucinations" when they don't align with factual reality, regardless of the reason why that happens and whether it should be considered a bug or a featur
105.
by Al-Khwarizmi 11mo ago
I remember that. I studied CS in that period and some professors were convinced that software development was going to become an unskilled job, analogous to bricklaying, and that our goal as future CS graduates should be to become managers,
106.
by Al-Khwarizmi 11mo ago
But what's the logic? I have never seen it but it doesn't sound good even aesthetically (which is usually the justification for all kinds of violations of common sense). So what are they thinking?
107.
by Al-Khwarizmi 11mo ago
WhatsApp is primarily a text-based chat interface and it has pretty much universal adoption in the countries where it's popular.
108.
by Al-Khwarizmi 11mo ago
> OpenAI enabled its users to have a sext conversation. Considering that this is only with verified adults, how is this "evil"? I find it more evil to treat full grown adult users as kids and heavily censor their use of LLMs. (
109.
by Al-Khwarizmi 11mo ago
Indeed. To me, it has long been clear that LLMs do things that, at the very least, are indistinguishable from reasoning. The already classic examples where you make them do world modeling (I put an ice cube into a cup, put the cup in a blac
110.
by Al-Khwarizmi 1y ago
I don't know how it is in the US and other countries, but in my country I would say statistics is typically not taught well, at least in CS degrees. I was a very good student, always had good understanding at the subjects at university
111.
by Al-Khwarizmi 1y ago
In the UK, Singapore and maybe other countries with British influence, they use the word travelator, which I find quite cool as well.
112.
by Al-Khwarizmi 1y ago
Yeah, that's what I'm trying to explain (maybe unsuccessfully). I do know backprop, I studied and used it back in the early 00s when it was very much not cool. But I don't think that knowledge is especially useful to use LLMs
113.
by Al-Khwarizmi 1y ago
The post I was replying to was about "colleagues, who are extremely invested in capabilities of LLMs" and then mentions how they are uninterested in how they work and just interested in what they can do and societal implications.
114.
by Al-Khwarizmi 1y ago
I don't think that's a good analogy, becuase if you're trying to train a single layer perceptron to approximate XOR you're not the end user.
115.
by Al-Khwarizmi 1y ago
You can still understand that quite well without understanding backprop, though. All you need is: - Basic understanding of how a Markov chain can generate text (generating each word using corpus statistics on the previous few words). - Unde
116.
by Al-Khwarizmi 1y ago
What's wrong or odd about that? You can like a technology as a user and not want to delve into how it works (sentence written by a human despite use of "delve"). Everyone should have some notions on what LLMs can or cannot do
117.
by Al-Khwarizmi 1y ago
You picked the arguably most impactful AI/ML paper of the century so far, no wonder you don't find others with similar impact. Not every paper can be a world-changing breakthrough. Which doesn't mean that more modest papers a
118.
by Al-Khwarizmi 1y ago
There are tools that claim accuracies in the 95%-99% range. This is useless for many actual applications, though. For example, in teaching, you really need to not have false positives at all. The alternative is failing some students because
119.
by Al-Khwarizmi 1y ago
In my previous post up the thread I said that we should measure whether in fact it does more good than harm or not. That's the context of my comment, I'm not saying we should just take it for granted without looking.
120.
by Al-Khwarizmi 1y ago
> Maybe it's causing even more deaths than we know, and these doesn't make the news either? Of course, and that's part of why I say that we need to measure the impact. It could be net positive or negative, we won't

More ›