alganet

6 ms·

31.
by alganet 1y ago
> the model correctly notices something unusual is happening before it starts talking about the concept. But not before the model is told is being tested for injection. Not that surprising as it seems. > For the “do you detect an inje
32.
by alganet 1y ago
A skeptic is just someone with a very fine tuned intuition for detecting bullshit.
33.
by alganet 1y ago
Photoshop is a clustershit of UI mess and professionals use it. Then, home users , following the popularity, also use it. Maybe we should just say free software is amazing and not a tool for home users, in order to get home users to use
34.
by alganet 1y ago
AGI does not currently exist. We're trying to think what we want from it. Like a perfect microwave oven. If a company says they're going to make a perfect microwave oven, I want the crusty dough and delicious gratin cheese effect
35.
by alganet 1y ago
> AI are better than most humans at dealing with human suckage That is a valid opinion, but subjective . If I say that they're not better, we're going to be exchanging anecdotes and getting nowhere. Hence, the need for a less
36.
by alganet 1y ago
Yep, humans suck in all kinds of ways. When AI gets better than us at dealing with it, then you can use that argument. That hasn't happened yet.
37.
by alganet 1y ago
Microwaves didn't replace ovens. The Segway didn't replaced bikes. 3D movies didn't replace IMAX. I can go on and on... Some things fail, or fail to meet their initial overblown expectations. The microwave oven was indeed a c
38.
by alganet 1y ago
The issue is if they lash out in some incomprehensible way, or lash out as a alien superingelligence. If they lash out as a human, that's fine.
39.
by alganet 1y ago
I don't understand your point. How does that observation help in setting up a test or definition?
40.
by alganet 1y ago
I don't see how that changes anything. Failing like a human would is not a cute add-on. It's a fundamental requirement for creating AIs that can replace humans.
41.
by alganet 1y ago
If your definition of AGI is filing taxes, then it's fine. Once we step into any other problem, then you need to measure that other problem as well. Lots of problems are concerned with how an intelligent being could fail. Our society i
42.
by alganet 1y ago
He also never says that ~every adult human should pass, ever. He never denied your claim, so you concluded you must be right. A most curious way of thinking.
43.
by alganet 1y ago
Do you understand how using statistics to determine degrees of certainty works? That is a must-have to understand academic work. I think that if you did, you wouldn't be answering like you did. https://en.wikipedia.org/
44.
by alganet 1y ago
You are wrong. Please read the Turing paper: https://courses.cs.umbc.edu/471/papers/turing.pdf > A number of interrogators could be used, and statistics compiled to show how often the right identification was g
45.
by alganet 1y ago
Because we have 300 thousand years of collective experience on dealing with humans.
46.
by alganet 1y ago
LLMs are trained on human data, and aimed at perform tasks in human roles. That's the goal. It is supposed to be super, but super human . Able to interact with us. Which leads us to the Turing Test (also, not a test... "the imitat
47.
by alganet 1y ago
Absolute definitions are weak. They won't settle anything. We know what we need right now, the next step. That step is a machine that, when it fails, it fails in a human way. Humans also make mistakes, and hallucinate. But we do it as
48.
by alganet 1y ago
That's probably a good thing.
49.
by alganet 1y ago
It happens. "Schema" is also foreign to REST. That is also a requirement coming from somewhere else. You're probably coming from a post-GraphQL generation. They introduced this idea of sharing a schema, and influenced a lot o
50.
by alganet 1y ago
Dude, he literally mentions Java Applets as an example (it was popular back then, if it was written today it would have been JavaScript). It's all there. Section 5.1.7. It's an optional constraint. It's valid for CSS, JavaScr
51.
by alganet 1y ago
That is just wrong. https://ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/net_arch_sty... The server MUST be stateless, the client MAY be stateful. You can't get ETags and stuff like that without a stateful cl
52.
by alganet 1y ago
You were forced to marry, or was that a choice you made on your own? Be careful with analogies.
53.
by alganet 1y ago
These folk are so unimaginative. There's an even worse scenario: We play expectations whack-a-mole forever and ever. It's already showing signs of that. The AI discourse is a whack-a-mole machine of hypotheticals. What if it nev
54.
by alganet 1y ago
Fair point. There is much laziness in the package approach to software development, and unless you're doing pure assembly, you're no less guilty for vibe coding than the guy who plays npm like lego. I think the most interesting po
55.
by alganet 1y ago
Damn, I'm kind of ashamed that I haven't checked the final result myself. I assumed simonw checked it before posting and blindly went with it.
56.
by alganet 1y ago
Yes, please, antagonize technical expertise! When shit hits the fan, it makes us look better.
57.
by alganet 1y ago
The Mythical Man-Month focuses on a simple idea. It can be summarized as "adding more workers to a project does not speed things up, that's a myth". It's in the title of the book. It's a good book. The entire IT f
58.
by alganet 1y ago
"AI is tearing my company apart, what should I do?" Step 1: Take a machete and tear it yourself. Step 2: Pretend nothing is being teared apart. Step 3: Go megalomaniacal. Sounds very solid. /s > "This is not like givi
59.
by alganet 1y ago
For the trust thing, don't use me as a benchmark. I am extremely distrustful of anything. Other people aren't, you're probably fine.
60.
by alganet 1y ago
> How would you validate "novel work" vs "performance theater"? I don't know. That's future shit, no one invented this yet. But I think someone will. Otherwise, hiring will become very difficult. As code bec

More ›