MarkusQ

20 ms·

331.
by MarkusQ 6mo ago
> Catching an LLM hallucinating often takes a basic understanding of what the answer should look like before asking the question. We had the same problem in the early days of calculators. Using a slide rule, you had to track the order o
332.
by MarkusQ 6mo ago
We do know. There have always been ways that people could avoid the painful process of learning, and...they don't learn. Here's a competing thought experiment: Jorge's Gym has a top notch body building program, which include
333.
by MarkusQ 6mo ago
It doesn't contradict the logic of the essay. There are flowers that look & smell like female wasps well enough to fool male wasps into "mating" with them. But they don't fly off and lay wasp eggs afterwards.
334.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
Just answered my own question to my satisfaction; they are stars. The same specs, which match star charts, show up in two images taken a few moments apart at different exposures (links were given down-thread).
335.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
How do you know that they're stars? I believe they probably are stars as well (by visual comparison with a star chart, suitably rotated), but I've found no source for either claim. I did find multiple sources, including TFA, for
336.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
Well one of them is obviously Venus. How did you determine the others weren't stars?
337.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
Sped through that, couldn't stomach the whole thing. Is there more to it than "argument by sneering dismissal"? (Basically, so far as I can tell, her point seems to be "this was intended as a joke to see if you're
338.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
Some days I wonder if the most effective way to hide a message at this point in history is to simply write it out, as clearly as possible, in plain English. For some reason, many people have trouble reading (or even detecting) this. Damn.
339.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
Pro tip: If you're trying to raise awareness of an issue that's important to you, don't lard up your exposition with sarcasm, insider references and incomprehensible innuendo. If all you manage to communicate is that you&#x2
340.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
LOL. You win. Completely unironically, I bow to your internet powress. I spewed coffee, and am still chuckling. Well played.
341.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
I can confirm the later effect; prior to the internet, my primary exposure to sans serif fonts were government documents and forms, and advertisements, neither of which inculcated an association with any virtues.
342.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
In a loose sense, sure. But speaking more precisely: 1) the question isn't open; they aren't sentient, 2) if LLMs were sentient, they could manipulate people, but since they aren't they could still be used to manipulate peopl
343.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
Interesting. Though it might make more sense to have them just guide the conversation and save the transcripts I suppose.
344.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
Thank you for the TLDR; as you guessed, I didn't want to read your wall of text. > you basically are completely wrong about where the propensity to induce > delusion comes from, specifically in a way that leaves you and anyone wh
345.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
You're making the same mistake here that get people into trouble. People aren't talking to another sentient entity (though some of them fervently think so) and it isn't manipulating them. They are making faces in a metaphori
346.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
This is one side on a contentious, litigious, high-stakes issue telling us about the conduct of the other side. Set your skepticism accordingly. (Also be sure to check your doubt-diodes periodically; it's quite possible for both sides
347.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
"For almost the last two centuries, we have grown accustomed to [...]including practices such as peer review" Nitpick: peer review as we know it is only about fifty years old. https://books.google.com/ngrams/g
348.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
You had grad students? Ha, we would'a killed for grad students. Our work was reviewed by two trained pigeons and a dead salmon. And we liked it!
349.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
Hang in there. As the kids get older, "XOR" can turn into "WITH".
350.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
The axes are independent. You can have seamless friendships with people who are very different from you, and contentious relationships with folks who are just like you (but doing it wrong!) There's nothing wrong with having to work at
351.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
It may be terrifying, but it's also terribly important. If the friendship can't survive differences, you're going to silently censor any points of differences (real or imagined) and soon you're just pretending to be the
352.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
If you work at the company you have almost certainly signed an agreement not to disclose such information; if you do so, you are violating the agreement. But that isn't insider trading. If you hold a position of fiduciary responsibili
353.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
I seem to have touched a nerve. In my defense, it may have been a stupid joke but it's not as stupid as trying to prevent brain damage by taking cannabinoids at levels known to cause brain damage.
354.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
The issue isn't Russians using Starlink inside Russia (they have other option, e.g. wired system, etc. there); the issue was their using it for drones and other combat operations inside Ukraine (including Ukrainian territory presently
355.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
Remove them and replace them with...Doritos?
356.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
Several decades? Seriously? Several decades ago, we barely had the internet, rockets were single use only, and smart phones were coming any day now. CRISPR was yet to be named, social media meant movies from Blockbusters or HBO that you w
357.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
> Your analysis is useless, irrespective of how correct it is. Generally, knowing the truth is more useful than the alternative. > There are countries with a freer press that fare better. That's a non-sequitur if I ever saw squir
358.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
I have no idea what you are talking about. I'm firmly in favor of fact based thinking, and (I suspect) share your disdain for magical thinking. My objection is to the selective use of statistics to shape the facts to support a predef
359.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
Nothing compared to what the misuse of statistics to give bunk a veneer of mathy authority has done though.
360.
by MarkusQ 7mo ago
I was just thinking the same thing. The vitriol/projective pessimism on display above seems wildly inauthentic.

More ›