chermi

15 ms·

211.
by chermi 3mo ago
Late to this post, but my impression was that later models would be more efficient per task? Wouldn't they save compute released fable 5, maybe capping the effort, if it is actually a better model?
212.
by chermi 4mo ago
Can you please point me to the proof of the first claim?
213.
by chermi 4mo ago
Lol I feel like no one has any attention span here. Tech shit is expensive in the beginning when it's new. It gets cheaper with time. This is a tech forum, don't we know this? Of course people overreact in both directions on both
214.
by chermi 4mo ago
I mean, didn't we give the government and the public long enough to prove they could provide abundant, cheap nuclear? They were so closed in the 60/70s and have since failed miserably and everyone has suffered for it. Cheap, abun
215.
by chermi 4mo ago
That's the permit/approval for the pilot/test, right? There are about a million approvals they need to get through. Are they using the DoE fast tracking method?
216.
by chermi 4mo ago
Yes. And to anyone paying attention, this has been current since about 2010.
217.
by chermi 4mo ago
Because the laws are different? Are you really confused?
218.
by chermi 4mo ago
Most mathematicians don't take pride in their results having no applications. That's just not true. Maybe some quirky pure logicians or something. But otherwise 90%+* of mathematicians I know would be at least satisfied if not thr
219.
by chermi 4mo ago
This is why he needs a down vote button
220.
by chermi 5mo ago
Wouldn't that just accelerate collapse? How much do you trust the outputs of the llm to provide trustworthy and valuable new information? I mean I understand distillation works. But that's much more structured and thoughtful than
221.
by chermi 5mo ago
Ummm, why not both?
222.
by chermi 5mo ago
I am very skeptical that musk is 10-20% interest. I would guess closer to 5.
223.
by chermi 5mo ago
I've accidentally clicked ai mode probably 3+ times a week recently, so that's some real good metrics ;)
224.
by chermi 5mo ago
If only there was a way to think beyond direct substitution.
225.
by chermi 5mo ago
More predictive power is always a good goal, full stop. This is orthogonal to whether the model producing prediction helps with "understanding" directly. Predictability encodes understanding in a strict information theoretic sens
226.
by chermi 5mo ago
Per frontier token. You're not calculating the cost of a fixed quality asset here. Old hw running non-frontier models will be very valuable. In fact, we have two direct examples: older server gpus actually appreciating and the very o
227.
by chermi 5mo ago
What? Go volunteer at a botanical garden or something.
228.
by chermi 5mo ago
Yeah. It's called brain drain. Talent has options. It weighs pros and cons. When the relative attraction of a country and thus institutions within it drops, they choose to go there less. To be clear, I would still choose to do my PhD i
229.
by chermi 5mo ago
It's really kind of gross. Psychologists should know best about what kind of damage the social media shit does.
230.
by chermi 5mo ago
Am I the only one that thinks a test in a technical discipline is poorly designed if more than one person gets a 100%? Exams are supposed to be hard. School is supposed to push you to learn the subject as best as possible.
231.
by chermi 5mo ago
I dread the day this collapse of thinking ability hits physics education. Maybe it already has.
232.
by chermi 5mo ago
No. The title has a question mark. And the premise that many people think lightning is a dielectric breakdown from high voltage is accurate (if not those words). Posing it as a question is completely valid because it still is an open questi
233.
by chermi 5mo ago
I just don't think it's that great? It's cool, I just don't think we should all accept it's the greatest. I mean I feel like some spacex stream segments are more awe-inspiring than this. Or some planet earth shots.
234.
by chermi 5mo ago
Please explain what makes them good? They make a better product than most, but they also charge more than most. That's just a business model.
235.
by chermi 5mo ago
I mean I agree with you. But also, it's not that unreasonable of an opinion. As long as it's coupled with optionality, which I think is the actual issue. Well the actual "issue" is that most people don't care or
236.
by chermi 5mo ago
Explain exactly what's click bait about it? Spell it out like I'm an idiot who found the article quite good for a fairly wide audience.
237.
by chermi 5mo ago
My half-baked solution is requiring colocation of the "why" for every decision and doc the llm writes, ideally my exact words. And similarly, every so often the llm why it's doing something reveals a mismatch between your in
238.
by chermi 5mo ago
I find the intent/why very important. I have a rule in vault related that basically anytime CC writes a WHAT (requirement, concept, RFC) it must colocated a WHY and the WHY should be MY words. It helps resolve a lot of confusion.
239.
by chermi 5mo ago
I find the landscape perspective very valuable when trying to understand NN. Why SGD finds the right buckets? I am not super current, but this looked like the right trail to me -- https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract&
240.
by chermi 5mo ago
Really? Even meats? Or drinks?

More ›