anoncareer0212

7 ms·

1.
by anoncareer0212 9mo ago
[flagged]
2.
by anoncareer0212 11mo ago
Right, and Pets.com isn't OpenAI. It's frustrated trolling dressed up in "greybeard" clothes.
3.
by anoncareer0212 11mo ago
This is all about OpenAI, not about AI being subsidized...with some sort of directive to copy/paste "OpenAI" for all the big AI providers? (presumably you meant s/OpenAI/$PROVIDER?) If that's what you meant: Go
4.
by anoncareer0212 11mo ago
Source on it being subsidized? :) (there isn't one, other than an aggro subset of people lying to eachother that somehow literally everyone is losing money, while posting record profit margins) ( https://en.wikipedia.org&#x2
5.
by anoncareer0212 1y ago
Counterpoint: I Google'd "jmap gmail" and a top result is a comment from HN in 2019 saying Gmail will never implement JMAP (it has not) That's a really cruel response, because this is important work. I don't wan
6.
by anoncareer0212 1y ago
What does actually reason mean? It's doing this complex anesthesiologist x crna x resident surgery scheduling thingy for ~60 surgeries a day for this one client. Looked a lot like LSAT logic games stuff scaled up to me, took me almost
7.
by anoncareer0212 1y ago
> ...they were the only ones at the table with OpenAI many months before the release of GPT-OSS In the spirit of TFA: This isn't true, at all. I don't know where the idea comes from. You've been repeating this claim freque
8.
by anoncareer0212 1y ago
Why bother to be on a discussion forum if you're so pressed for time that you're lashing out at people agreeing with you and consider any interlocution a waste of time? From the outside, it looks like all you get out of this is fe
9.
by anoncareer0212 1y ago
Been here for 15 years, and there's standards for interaction, especially for 19 day old accounts. I recommend other sites if you're expecting to be dismissive and rude without strong intellectual pushback.
10.
by anoncareer0212 1y ago
> midpoint of the 0-1 luminance range There are two physical quantities for luminance, relative, and perceptual, so that passed along a nugget for those not as wise as you who might not know that :) As you know and have mentioned, using
11.
by anoncareer0212 1y ago
Be careful when rushing. Your viewpoint as expressed is perfectly rational. However, you know that both of these claims asked about are blatantly false, and were distracted by the idea that saying those claims is false also implies all a
12.
by anoncareer0212 1y ago
I lay out above, the IEEE article linked lays out, and you come across to me as having domain knowledge to understand that having electron-positron collisions at the same energy level of LHC lets us nail down the hints of what we saw at LHC
13.
by anoncareer0212 1y ago
> The world is really doomed... Sadly, it absolutely 100% is. She's an amazing case of this. I'll spend the next 2 years gently walking people down from her clickbait, and I'll end up with net-negative karma for it. I ho
14.
by anoncareer0212 1y ago
Hmmm, I might be rounding off wrong? Or reading it wrong? IIUC the data we have: 2K tokens / 12 seconds = 166 tokens/s prefill 120K tokens / (10 minutes == 600 seconds) = 200 token/s prefill
15.
by anoncareer0212 1y ago
Small point of order: > entire point...smaller download could not justify... Q4_K_M has layers and layers of consensus and polling and surveying and A/B testing and benchmarking to show there's ~0 quality degradation. Built ove
16.
by anoncareer0212 1y ago
Small point of order: bit slower might not set expectations accurately. You noted in a previous post in the same thread[^1] that we'd expect about a 1 minute per 10K tokens(!) prompt processing time with the smaller model. I agree, a
17.
by anoncareer0212 2y ago
>>> This is an ad hominem which assumes intent unknown to anyone other than the person to whom you replied. >> [elided] What am I missing here? > Intent. Neither you nor I know what the person to whom you replied had. Here
18.
by anoncareer0212 2y ago
> Do I need to tell you how to communicate? No? By the way, what is this comment, exactly? What is it trying to communicate? What I'm understanding is, it is good to talk down to people about how "they can't communicate&qu
19.
by anoncareer0212 2y ago
FrontierMath benchmark people saying OpenAI had shared folder access to some subset of eval Qs, which has been replaced, take a few leaps, and yes, that's getting "data under the table" - but, those few leaps! - and which, le
20.
by anoncareer0212 2y ago
The link has data. The link shows a significant reduction. grep hallucination, or, https://imgur.com/a/mkDxe78 .
21.
by anoncareer0212 2y ago
Lying is defined as "used with reference to a situation involving deception or founded on a mistaken impression." What am I missing here? Those weren't curt summaries, they were quotes! And not pull quotes, they were the uned
22.
by anoncareer0212 2y ago
You're right, upon reflection, it seems there might be some misunderstandings here: Motte and Bailey refers to an argumentative tactic where someone switches between an easily defensible ("motte") position and a less defensi
23.
by anoncareer0212 2y ago
"Early testing doesn't show that it hallucinates less, but we expect that putting ["we expect it will hallucinate less"] nearby will lead you to draw a connection there yourself"." The link, the link we are dis
24.
by anoncareer0212 2y ago
Motte: "They got caught getting benchmark data under the table" Bailey: "one is free to trust their "verbal agreement" that they did not train their models on that, but access they did have." Sigh.
25.
by anoncareer0212 2y ago
It's in the link. I don't know what else to say. Here, imgur: https://imgur.com/a/mkDxe78 . Can't get easier. > equally unfounded attacks No, because I have a source and didn't make up things some
26.
by anoncareer0212 2y ago
> Frankly the argument "they shouldn't need to query the data in their system" is kind of silly. Neutral party here: that's not what they said. A) Quotes shouldn't be there. B) Heuristic I've started applyin
27.
by anoncareer0212 2y ago
I see, I'm sorry that's happening :/ I was lucky enough to transition from college dropout waiter to tech startup on the back of the iPad, 6 years in, sold it and ended up at still-good 2016 Google. Left in 2023 because of so
28.
by anoncareer0212 2y ago
You keep changing topics so I don't get it either, I can attest it's not a fringe view that the situation is interesting, seen it discussed several times today by unrelated people.
29.
by anoncareer0212 2y ago
That sounds somewhat specious, lying about what you support in your cost calculation library is a pretty big oof. It's hard to rank it versus kicking puppys, but, I don't think we have to stack-rank bad things to figure out if it&
30.
by anoncareer0212 2y ago
Because HN caps posts, and I wasn't going to let you off with a post 24 hours later with more lazy trolling.

More ›