lisper

22 ms·

271.
Darvaza Gas Crater(en.wikipedia.org)
2 points by lisper 1y ago|0 comments
272.
by lisper 1y ago
Ah. For years I have been submitting links through a bookmarklet that goes to /submitlink rather than submit, so I don't get the text box. I wonder why this feature isn't used more often.
273.
by lisper 1y ago
This story has something I've never seen on HN before: underneath the title and the subsequent "X points by colesantiago N hours ago | flag | hide ..." line, there is a link to https://storage.courtlistener.com&#x2
274.
by lisper 1y ago
No idea, sorry. [UPDATE] There is a clue in section 3.3.1 Minimal Declaration Processing Requirements: "A safety declaration that increases the current safety level must always be recognized. An implementation that always processes co
275.
by lisper 1y ago
Yes, of course that is true. When I said that QC is "just an engineering problem" I did not mean to imply that it was straightforward. It's not. It's a Really Really Hard engineering problem with a lot of unknowns. I
276.
by lisper 1y ago
> it allows for undefined behavior, but UB is (mostly, as far as I know, I'm sure someone will jump in and correct me ;) ) off by default. It's actually much more sophisticated than that. See: https://www.lispworks.
277.
by lisper 1y ago
It's certainly possible that computers will suffer from all the same foibles that humans do, but we have a lot of evolutionary baggage that computers don't, so I don't see any fundamental reason why AGIs could not transcend t
278.
by lisper 1y ago
It's not really about "steps", it's about getting the architecture right. LLMs by themselves are missing two crucial ingredients: embodiment and feedback. The reason they hallucinate is that they have no idea what the
279.
by lisper 1y ago
But QC is quite plausible. There is no theoretical constraint that makes it impossible. It really is just an engineering problem at this point.
280.
by lisper 1y ago
Yes, that's right. The ostensible idea behind subsumption is dead (because it was wrong). But what subsumption did was open up the possibility of putting the AI into the run-time feedback loop rather than the deliberative planning, a
281.
by lisper 1y ago
No, LLMs are a real breakthrough even if they are not by themselves reliable enough to produce a commercially viable application. Before LLMs, no one knew how to even convincingly fake a natural language interaction. I see LLMs as analogo
282.
by lisper 1y ago
The comment you're responding to specified heaver-than-air. (And it should have been even more constrained: the real milestone was heavier-than-air powered flight.)
283.
by lisper 1y ago
I'm sympathetic to this argument, but nearly every technological breakthrough in history has been accompanied by plausible-sounding arguments as to why it should have been impossible. I myself left my career as an AI researcher about
284.
by lisper 1y ago
> So how many gates are we talking to factor some "cryptographically useful" number? That is a hard question to answer for two reasons. First, there is no bright line that delineates "cryptographically useful". And
285.
by lisper 1y ago
> God actor Oops.
286.
by lisper 1y ago
Yes, that's what makes it hard. You can't just fake it. It's is the same thing that makes acting hard. Good actors aren't faking it.
287.
by lisper 1y ago
> I can't turn my weird off That might be your problem right there. Deciding you can't do something is always a self-fulfilling prophecy. How hard have you tried? I learned to turn my weird off a long time ago. It wasn'
288.
by lisper 1y ago
> People gush about infinity, but I find it to be a pretty boring You need to look at this: https://neugierde.github.io/cantors-attic/
289.
by lisper 1y ago
This too: https://www.mrob.com/pub/math/largenum.html
290.
Ehrenfest paradox: the circumference of a relativistic rotating disk is <2πr(en.wikipedia.org)
2 points by lisper 1y ago|0 comments
291.
The Block Stacking Problem(sites.pitt.edu)
136 points by lisper 1y ago|36 comments
292.
by lisper 1y ago
Um, no? Python 3.11.6 (v3.11.6:8b6ee5ba3b, Oct 2 2023, 11:18:21) [Clang 13.0.0 (clang-1300.0.29.30)] on darwin Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. &gt
293.
by lisper 1y ago
Lisp in ~100 lines of Python: https://flownet.com/ron/l.py
294.
Worst. Puzzle. Ever. (2009)(blog.rongarret.info)
3 points by lisper 1y ago|0 comments
295.
by lisper 1y ago
Here's an essay I wrote 15 years ago about another "unreasonable" puzzle: https://blog.rongarret.info/2009/12/worst-puzzle-ever.html
296.
by lisper 1y ago
I can tell you from personal experience that organizing a "fake" conference is beyond trivial. All you need is a topic that is narrow enough that all of the attendees know and like each other. I was an attendee at several such c
297.
by lisper 1y ago
You don't even have to change the laws. Just changing the social norms would be enough. At the moment our social norms are that the ends justify the means. If you make money, or produce something that looks like a breakthrough, that
298.
by lisper 1y ago
> search is a fairly simple control loop That's like saying that Darwinian evolution is simple. It's not entirely wrong, but it misses the point rather badly. The thing that makes search useful is not the search per se, it&#x
299.
by lisper 1y ago
But do these characters correspond to sounds ?
300.
by lisper 1y ago
No, I don't think that test-time compute is the same thing at all. It's a little challenging to find a definitive definition of TTC, but AFAICT it is just a fairly simple control loop around an LLM. What I'm describing is a

More ›