TheEzEzz

8 ms·

1.
by TheEzEzz 7mo ago
> The "top researchers" in AI are Chinese. And I am skeptical that they even remotely have the philosophical or political alignment you are attempting to project on to them. I assure you that Chinese researchers have a diversit
2.
by TheEzEzz 8mo ago
The problem with censorship isn't that it degrades performance. The problem is that if the censorship is unilaterally dictated by a government then it becomes a tool for suppression, especially as people use AI more and more for their
3.
by TheEzEzz 2y ago
I wrote my own dynamic keyboard layout to optimize typing speed while procrastinating on my dissertation. 15 years later I'm still using it. My dissertation not so much. Procrastination is (sometimes) awesome.
4.
by TheEzEzz 2y ago
I could easily see this going the other way. Life long single people develop strong social networks that they keep investing in into old age. Married (and with children especially!) couples invest less time in their social network, in old a
5.
by TheEzEzz 2y ago
You're basically taking the model "off policy" when you bias the decoder, which can definitely make weird things happen.
6.
by TheEzEzz 2y ago
LeCun is very simply wrong in his argument here. His proof requires that all decoded tokens are conditionally independent, or at least that the chance of a wrong next token is independent. This is not the case. Intuitively, some tokens are
7.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
For example with facial recognition, see this outcome with Rite Aid being banned from using it after a "warning shot" https://techcrunch.com/2023/12/20/rite-aid-facial-recognitio...
8.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
Super cool. When I think about accelerating teams while maintaining quality/culture, I think about the adage "if you want someone to do something, make it easy." Maintaining great READMEs, documentation, onboarding docs, etc,
9.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
Good question. Perhaps depends on the type of warning shot. Plenty of media has an anti-tech bend and will publicize warning shots if they see them -- and they do this already with near term risks, such as facial recognition. If the warning
10.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
I agree -- the risks are bigger, the rewards larger, the variance much higher, and the theories much less mature. But what's striking to me as the biggest difference is the seeming lack of ideological battles in this Moon story. There
11.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
A good analogy for AI risk. We'd never visited the Moon before, or any other celestial object. The risk analysis was not "we've never seen life from a foreign celestial object cause problems on Earth, therefore we aren't
12.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
Supernova are powerful enough that even a star in a different solar system going nova can kill you, if it's a "nearby" system. But I believe there aren't any stars close enough that would go supernova any time soon.
13.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
Super cool, curious to see where you take this! I did some work on GPGPU for agent simulations for an RTS years ago ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4fKJIrv0J8 ). Doing things like pathfinding on the GPU gets tricky, espe
14.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
I watched this yesterday and got the feeling something big was happening. At one point he says "This is actually a very inconvenient time for me [to be here]." At the end of the session when they're wrapping up, he begins to
15.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
I'm sympathetic to your take on how overly grandiose the language is, but I also think you're being too harsh here. The idea that the universe is discrete/computational is a fine idea, but underspecified and useless on its ow
16.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
My advice is always to jump in and start building! My background is math originally, so I had some of the tools in my tool box, but I'm mostly self-taught in computer science and machine learning. I read textbooks, research papers, cod
17.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
We're design the stack to be fairly flexible. It's Python/Pytorch under the hood, with the ability to plug and play various off the shelf models. For ASR we support GCP/AssemblyAI/etc, as well as a customized self-h
18.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
Since this is getting a bit of interest, here's one more demo of this https://youtu.be/cvKUa5JpRp4 This demo shows even lower latency, plus the ability to handle very large menus with lots of complicated sub-options (t
19.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
Thanks! It's a lot of fun building with these new models and recent AI approaches.
20.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
Lots of work around speculative decoding, optimizing across the ASR->LLM->TTS interfaces, fine-tuning smaller models while maintaining accuracy (lots of investment here), good old fashioned engineering around managing requests to the
21.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
Good question. Off the shelf TTS systems tend to enunciate every phoneme more like a radio talk show host rather than a regular person, which I find a bit off putting. I've been playing around with trying to get the voice to be more co
22.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
100% Python but with a good deal of multiprocessing, speculative decoding, etc. As we move to production we can probably shave another 100ms off by moving over to a compiled system, but Python is great for rapid iteration.
23.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
It's trained to ignore everything else. That way background conversations are ignored as well (like your kids talking in the back of the car while you order).
24.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
Definitely depends on the application, agreed. The more open ended the application the more dependent it is on larger LLMs (and other systems) that don't easily fit on edge. At the same time, progress is happening that is increasing th
25.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
Completely agree, latency is key for unlocking great voice experiences. Here's a quick demo I'm working on for voice ordering https://youtu.be/WfvLIEHwiyo Total end-to-end latency is a few hundred milliseconds: st
26.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
Interesting analogy. I feel like I talk and think faster when I'm drunk but am also more focused and can hold less in my mind. I'm wondering if it's because I'm switching into single threaded mode instead of multi-thread
27.
by TheEzEzz 3y ago
It's not that the in-falling particle is an anti-particle which annihilates with a particle inside the black hole. There are no particles inside the black hole, in theory, it's just a singularity. Instead it's that when one o
28.
by TheEzEzz 4y ago
I'm not a laser expert, but they seem reasonably similar and dissimilar on the surface. Lasers were first theorized in 1917, which is 43 years between theory and first demonstration. Quantum computing theory seems to date to 1980, also
29.
by TheEzEzz 4y ago
If you read the abstract it appears that ChatGPTs explanation is on point. You're right that the paper is relying on consistency, which doesn't guarantee accuracy, but it is what the paper is proposing (and they claim it does lead
30.
by TheEzEzz 4y ago
Huge news and big congrats! You've been an awesome inspiration. I'm really looking forward to where you take YC.

More ›