MrMcCall

61 ms·

811.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Well put, and that's a good part of the reason they're going the way of the Catholic Church. That said, I'd call it an 'aristocracy' instead. But, tomato/tomahto, ya know?
812.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Stanford has a business school, doesn't it?
813.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
I think this is a nice idea, a way to serve the underserved. However, from the front page: > We do not judge the motivations of our users In an age of doxing, swatting, and cold-calling telemarketers, I hope that some tracability (at lea
814.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
That's a lot of energy used to save you going through the octopus section of Wikipedia. If only there was a test to find out if the person using it was a moron. Then it might be useful. Of course, Dunning-Kruger dictates that no one us
815.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Thanks. That is precisely how I intuited the situation. 40+ years of programming FTW!
816.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Well, if that's the case, then the situation is worse than I imagined. I thought that training the model would be far more expensive computationally than using it to compute an 'answer'. Thanks.
817.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
No one is 'gaining knowledge'. LLMs are just black-box tools that compute pseudo answers based upon a somewhat arbitrary set of training data. It's a crapshoot that looks good like ELIZA looks good.
818.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
By 'inference', do you mean using the model to compute a specific series of results?
819.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
I'm curious how many defects creep into the process. I doubt the scientists have any idea, and I'm pretty sure the process involves a great deal of statistical inference to reconstruct the genome from many, many small chunks of DN
820.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
You're not counting the training of the LLM.
821.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
You did not count the gathering of data and then training the LLM.
822.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
"If my aunt had a d_ck, she'd be my uncle." --Louisiana saying I like your idea, but there's no patience or monetary motivation to postpone the energy use until more sane facilities are built.
823.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
We're having a global heating problem, so the water use is just a symptom of our systemic abuse of the planet's resources.
824.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Here's the reality: just because a lot of people are doing something, it doesn't mean thay're not sunk-cost fools.
825.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Yeah, having less data centers will cost lives; it won't be lack of drinking water or living in an overheated environment! My mistake is mistaking high karma for intelligence. Wrong again!
826.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Someone doesn't believe in global heating.
827.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
You are far more energically efficient than a data center. Wetware >>> software
828.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Yeah, I'm personally not a huge fan, but it's not nearly as bad as what any gambling destination is. That is nearly pure waste, with the possibility that people are seriously damaging themselves with addiction and alcohol. There i
829.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
So do coal-fired power plants. So does our endless production of plastic waste and our ever-growing landfills. So does all our fossil-fuel use. Where is it all taking us, friend? Most people are not honest enough with themself to understand
830.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Somebody wants it, or it wouldn't be being built. No, the correct framing is that this is a case of the ignorant leading the powerless.
831.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
ChatGPT is not housing anyone, nor is it providing office space. Even Disneyland is at least providing joy for children and adults.
832.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
All that to get some percent hallucination, whose logic can't be traced? It's just another tech dead-end that leaves us all the worse, and the haves having more. It's just more waste on the level of bitcoin. It's the nat
833.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
There are degrees; complete sociopathy is unlikely because it defeats self-preservation. Most people are mostly selfish towards out-groups. But, yeah, some mothers are really selfish.
834.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
I can't provide what is, by definition, subjective proof. You must seek and find it yourself, in accordance with our shared universe, which has the same interface with you as it does with me. You could not look at me and comprehend the
835.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Thanks for that. I stand corrected. But my comment was geared towards those who believe that what I am suggesting is impossible, so to them, the only possibilities left are what they consider impossible. My favorite quote from Holmes is the
836.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
I suggest that our universal resistence to such ideas is the result of a concerted effort upon our minds and hearts to convince us to embrace selfishly ignorant foolishness rather than selflessly wise service. There is talk here on HN about
837.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
The test is to connect with our Creator and ask for the proof you seek. It is why we are here, but we are free to choose to ignore our potential, because our free will is so freely given that we are free to choose ignorance over fulfilling
838.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
It is not uncomfortable once we realizing that we are but a mote, a talented mote in charge of the Earth, but a mote nonetheless. Once reaching humility, we are then free to bask in the glory of being a human being with the power to choose
839.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Loving God is not for God's benefit, for It can gain nothing from us. Loving It reflects back into our consciousness, thereby helping us become love-oriented. Our free will is so sacrosanct that we are free to deny that we even have it
840.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
This appears to only be in German: https://zwwa.de/ But this site has a few different languages, selectable in the upper-right corner of the page: https://mihr.com/ Note that the bulk of the teachings are a

More ›