amenhotep

30 ms·

1.
by amenhotep 5d ago
They obviously want to be able to invade Taiwan, yes, nobody serious would assert that they're developing amphibious capacity for self defence. That's not the same thing as planning to invade in 2027, though. Militaries can need a
2.
by amenhotep 8d ago
This really doesn't make it better.
3.
by amenhotep 8d ago
It would certainly make it less baffling how many people seem to insist they're not aware that they exist when Star Trek transporters etc come up.
4.
by amenhotep 8d ago
I'm on my phone so maybe I missed something but I didn't even see that this was about exceptions to the rule? It seemed to be more about cases where the first sound couldn't be recovered orthographically. He special cased her
5.
by amenhotep 8d ago
I think you're probably right, but your counterexamples don't really refute the strongest reading of the thesis. The military establishment has always ultimately held the reins in Pakistan, so the dynamic of civilians avoiding thr
6.
by amenhotep 1mo ago
I find it astonishing that people didn't turn off these memory systems the moment they were introduced. Half the point of these things is that I control exactly what information is introduced in each query. Sometimes Claude randomly re
7.
by amenhotep 1mo ago
Then perhaps this entire security model is less useful for normal people who have to exist in the world than it is for secret agents in movies. If you're carrying around the nuclear secrets on your phone then being able to irrecoverabl
8.
by amenhotep 1mo ago
That's true, we don't want it to do that, we want it to kill these parasitic entities. Much like one doesn't swat a mosquito because one will truly miss the amount of blood she's taking.
9.
by amenhotep 2mo ago
LLMs self-evidently have no experience when not inferencing, seems like the most consequential difference to me. If we are next token predictors then we are next token predictors that are inferencing at every waking moment and arguably much
10.
by amenhotep 3mo ago
Huh! I'd always accepted the backronym without even thinking about it, but it makes so much more sense as arbitrary letters associated with sequences that are very easy to remember and distinguish than as a real weird acronym that ju
11.
by amenhotep 3mo ago
That's the trick, isn't it, though? Rationally it's especially a problem if it happens all at once, but realistically if your bank has an awful quarter then you're at fault whereas if every bank has an awful quarter th
12.
by amenhotep 3mo ago
It's not tricking, though. The rules come from holy texts, they're perfect, if you find what seems like a loophole then it must obviously be intended. It's blasphemous , even, to think that you understand what god means bett
13.
by amenhotep 4mo ago
It's very simply explained by this being the most succinct way of wording it. Some methods of killing have verbs that suit mentioning the attacker - shoots, stabs. Some don't. "Rammed" or "runs over" isn't
14.
by amenhotep 4mo ago
I read it as "I'm very clever and sensible. I definitely don't believe in souls." Like so much other material produced by people who (I suspect deliberately) confuse religion with the subjective phenomenon of existen
15.
by amenhotep 5mo ago
It's not an ad hominem. In fact, it's perhaps the most good faith interpretation of your words possible. Ad hominem would be calling you stupid because you obviously know that you have a self and only your own stupidity could expl
16.
by amenhotep 5mo ago
Everyone involved in this including the police are civilians
17.
by amenhotep 5mo ago
I would suggest it says primarily that mimicking people's voices in meaningful ways is still far beyond LLMs and particularly small LLMs, but also more insurmountably that the prompt for Leavitt herself contains many tokens that the LL
18.
by amenhotep 5mo ago
And once the initial install of something was complete, you'd then be able to run it with no further ado :D
19.
by amenhotep 5mo ago
What on earth does defamation being a civil offense have to do with anything? It's a civil offense in the UK too, criminal defamation hasn't been a thing since 2010 and was barely a thing before then. If you want to confidently po
20.
by amenhotep 6mo ago
No it isn't. He says nothing about what his first choice good national park is. That section is about parks that people say are bad but aren't . His contention is merely that it is fine.
21.
by amenhotep 6mo ago
Yeah. We know. That's why it's so fucking awful.
22.
by amenhotep 6mo ago
In fact, a certain amount of investment in frauds is acceptable and desirable; if you give £10m to 9 frauds who spunk it straight up the wall and to 1 true visionary who builds a unicorn, that's money well spent. Plus of course you can
23.
by amenhotep 6mo ago
It's possible to mandate effective parental controls and then say "it's illegal to give your child access to facebook" and then just see what happens. You don't have to jump straight to making it technologically gua
24.
by amenhotep 6mo ago
It is difficult not to dismiss this sort of proof out of hand, because every religion engages in it. Buddhism can probably (?) coexist with many deist religions, but few of them can coexist with each other.
25.
by amenhotep 6mo ago
It's a word that's commonly used incorrectly, yes.
26.
by amenhotep 6mo ago
Jail? Just for saying you're English?
27.
by amenhotep 6mo ago
You've put "helpless nematodes" in quotes despite the article literally not once saying that. It says: > Oyster mushrooms also happen to be one of the few carnivorous mushrooms – preying mercilessly on nematode worms. That
28.
by amenhotep 6mo ago
Marshall didn't research anything, he just made it up.
29.
by amenhotep 6mo ago
Most of the War Thunder leaks just aren't. What frequently happens is that people go and dig up a manual that's published openly in America but controlled under ITAR (I think), post it, and Gaijin delete the post and ban them beca
30.
by amenhotep 6mo ago
I'm delighted to see somebody else who refuses to use the pompous syntax Apple promote for these things. Entire thread full of people uncritically accepting that they should be referred to in actual conversation as AirPods Max as if it

More ›