ToValueFunfetti

5 ms·

61.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
Oh, believe me, I've been on the losing side of that issue with you for ages. I absolutely agree it is unethical for anybody to violate anybody's free speech, etc, and that that multiplies with corporate power. But that means I&#x
62.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
An AI chatbot diagnosed my rolled shoulders. I had assumed I had bad workout form. I would google "discomfort in upper back" or whatever and it would say "back pain after exercise means take a rest" and I would rest and
63.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
That page specifically says the constitution grants rights to the government and reserves the rights of the people. There is a lot in there about the case against the bill of rights, a big part of which is that itemizing the rights impl
64.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
Less biased? Maybe on political questions, etc, but this is a classic NLP task and I expect LLMs to be very reliable here
65.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
They phrased it poorly, but from context it seems clear they intend the LLM as a less biased third-party measure of the tone which agrees with their own assessment.
66.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
I'm quite sure that LLMs are not one-to-one with our brains. It would at least be surprising if instrumental convergence was that powerful, and, even in that case, they're still not getting hungry or sleepy or having dreams, etc.
67.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
>It wouldn't be a bird anymore, but a dysfunctional cyborg with false perceptions. The criticism in the paper is of the architecture of LLMs, isn't it? The paper contends """Text generated by an LM is not grounde
68.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
A bird doesn't learn gravity or aerodynamics, it has no 'sense of physics'. It has sensory neural activity that a scientist can show is tied to these things, but you could, at least in theory, falsify the entire experience of
69.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
If someone substituted all of your sensory inputs for something else for your entire life, how would you notice? If you wore contacts from birth that made the sky red and earbuds that censored when people said it was blue, on what basis wou
70.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
Fair point, and on its own it would be surprising to learn what "five" means from that sentence. But you can extrapolate- across a billion sentences, there will be "the next sentence has five words"s and "this sente
71.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
I don't think this tone is at all justified. If you think otherwise, I do ask that you point out where I went too far in a comment that I feared was overburdened by caveats and admissions of my own human flaws. "This sentence has
72.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
The contention that there is no grounding because the training data is linguistic and thus can only reference a world model is disproven in "This sentence has five words"- there's real, grounded information about what &quot
73.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
This is not why she was fired and wouldn't have been a plausible reason in 2020 when it happened. >Timnit responded with an email requiring that a number of conditions be met in order for her to continue working at Google, including
74.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
Trump, Musk, Andreessen, Thiel, Biden, and Bankman-Fried all have or had a lot of power, and I would look to none of them if I wanted to get a better understanding of reality. If anything, I expect this kind of skin in the game to be strong
75.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
Throwaways are for anonymity, not for dodging the guidelines. Please don't pollute the community here.
76.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
Yeah, I think Ed's early stuff defeated the idea that the tech was worth big money at its state as of 2024, but it's clear in 2026 that this is something worth money to corporations. Just a question of how much + whether the Chine
77.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
To be clear, I'm not saying that they don't believe what they say, just that they don't evaluate arguments critically. It's easy to agree with every argument that supports your existing position, but it's a recipe f
78.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
I'd think the problem with fanboys is that they don't care about the truth of the underlying arguments. They just want to score points for their team. Do you have a different issue with them? If not, why not engage with the argume
79.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
I don't think Anthropic argues that distillation violates copyright. AFAIK, their position is that it violates their terms and conditions for interacting with their servers.
80.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
Right or wrong, I don't think conspiratorial is the right descriptor here. The pro-nuclear claim is that the very loud, very public anti-nuclear movement was influential in setting regulations of the industry. It's not "an ev
81.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
Are there particular responses you have in mind? I can find two comments making this point, one which opens with >Maybe I just have abnormal leverage while the other opens with >I'm curious The top two top-level comments are resp
82.
by ToValueFunfetti 3mo ago
You said that you misinterpreted the article in the same way in another comment 1 minute before you left this one. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48705638
83.
by ToValueFunfetti 4mo ago
This doesn't respond to my point at all. I tell you that it is ahistorical, dishonest, and disrespecful to equate subsistence farmers being forced into subsistence factory work by globalization and economic conditions with the holocaus
84.
by ToValueFunfetti 4mo ago
You seem to be missing a very important part of that history when you make this comparison, and it's a part that I can't imagine you aren't aware of. Not stating that is not "accurately stating history", it's l
85.
by ToValueFunfetti 4mo ago
I don't think most people would use this definition. It covers gambling/lottery winnings, finding buried treasure or a gold mine, and paying someone to file your taxes and splitting the extra deductions they found. Really, it incl
86.
by ToValueFunfetti 4mo ago
All humans do is predict the next action at any given time. You roll your eyes, it's a tired argument, but still. You have memories, a personality, thoughts ranging from the long running to the mere reflexive, you have a rich conscious
87.
by ToValueFunfetti 4mo ago
We're assuming per earlier hypothetical that it has a 10% correctness rate. You had said >In a regulated industry 90% false positive rate is indistinguishable from 100% failure rate So defending that position on the basis of it not
88.
by ToValueFunfetti 4mo ago
I just don't understand where your position is coming from here. You can't distinguish between a machine that says "here, look at these 170 results, 10% of them are highly serious problems that you should address, you should
89.
by ToValueFunfetti 4mo ago
It doesn't seem like you're engaging with the material circumstances described above. What does it mean for a human to not catch that a part of a codebase is actually compliant with regulations? What does it mean for the hallucina
90.
by ToValueFunfetti 4mo ago
God: "What is the mass of your consciousness? How is it formed? Where does it reside in space?" Man: "Uhh..." God: "How can you rectify quantum mechanics and relativity into a single coherent model? How does physics

More ›