mdp2021

25 ms·

631.
by mdp2021 3mo ago
....Dangerously suggestive post, when you show you don't have a proper idea of "AI" or won't use the term 'AI' properly.
632.
by mdp2021 3mo ago
> odd There is nothing odd in the basic principle of Economics of using a "good enough" tool, optimal in other respects (e.g. cheap/er). (You do not hire Nobel Prize winners as receptionists.) The issue remains, whether
633.
by mdp2021 3mo ago
It failed at the first "re-imagination" tried: the content as-if stated (say) that "the masses attract accordingly to the square of distances", and the rendered animation embraced a completely different law. To be able t
634.
by mdp2021 3mo ago
Fix the server network access filters.
635.
by mdp2021 3mo ago
> I've also always felt the same way You do not "feel". > Getting Dumber? Random people are getting dumber relatively to having become more vocal (the idiots have left the bars), properly cultivated people are just
636.
by mdp2021 3mo ago
But some (Meta, Anthropic) suggested that optimizing and extending the "<think>" process can produce extra value. (I do not know if that requires an improved underlying architecture - frontier models architectures are someti
637.
by mdp2021 3mo ago
> That people falling prey to social media in a manner similar to addiction would be comparable to not being able to control bodily functions? Yes, if some people were so intrigued by their stamp collection or their (groundless, it see
638.
by mdp2021 3mo ago
The one time in which I saw Juergen Schmidhuber in perfect nervous control, "coolness" they may say westward, was when he replied to one member of the audience, "The same observation was made when they invented fire: oh, it&#
639.
by mdp2021 3mo ago
> do you need to run every small problem through a 10B-30B model? ... We're asking frontier Opus/Fable models to classify text Actually probably yes: text analysis (magazine articles) by LLMs in the ~30b .. ~120b range failed
640.
by mdp2021 3mo ago
> Most humans don’t think this way, would you say they do not possess “intelligence”? Substantially yes (but for the improper semantic in that 'possess'), we would say "they don't use it" and importantly "
641.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
That indicates the primary blame is to be put on said algorithm. The admins' reaction is in the direction of "impeding web access".
642.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
This is the second level of the implementation of unintelligence. The first was when they most obviously acritically repeated what they heard, "hearsay machines", "stochastic parrots". Intelligence requires assessment ov
643.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
> You think people only breathe because their "functional families" remind them of it? No, I hinted that families in which phenomena of wellbeing loss are caused by access to resources can be suspect of being dysfunctional, a
644.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
What I had found instead were biases that seemed to be injected by the "role: system" instructions. Well, we need Intelligence (Pandora's box is open, now we need the Real Thing urgently). Typical (aggregate) positions, dumb
645.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
"Society without functional families reports choking hazard reduced after nation-wide beeps enacted to remind population to inhale" "Society without functional people reports eye strain reduced ever since population discourag
646.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
You are, I guess, supposed to prepend a 'Show HN: ' to this submission? https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html And I don't know why somebody flagged the presentation nearby.
647.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
> re-educate hundreds of millions of people That is mandated, and actually they are expected to get out of the house educated already (de jure. De facto, it's different, but they should anyway). > this symbol of hatred and gen
648.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
> It isn't hurting Hindus No, it's hurting all sensible people.
649.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
> instead of perpetuating the taint Which is also collaboration with the enemy: it is giving it power. (They allow the enemy to determine their culture; also, they allow the low to replace the high.)
650.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
> the percentage of population aware Very much not a good reason - in fact, a very bad reason. Conformist, destructive, declining, orwellian... You are not to speak like the ignorant.
651.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
Just an internal link should give the exemplary idea of what the other post is partially systematic about: https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=youtube.com
652.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
> Doesn't that depend on the implementation And which implementation of age verification would not cut off from the "restricted" side (including the "adult" part, i.e. exactly the part for the kids) of the Web
653.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
> limited use to me ... might be to you Absolutely not: it's objective. You "are doing it wrong". You must have a very naïve idea of that part of the Web. Read below. > YouTube ... an essential, and irreplaceable p
654.
The GUARD Act would sacrifice privacy and parental rights(reason.org)
2 points by mdp2021 4mo ago|0 comments
655.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
Masters', taken as a different kind of employment - you don't work for the benefit of others but for your own development. In other words, take the experience that maximizes your growth, intelligently taken. For example: master th
656.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
(Funny. What is meant there with "crabs"? Is it a typical behaviour of crabs to hold each other (so getting stuck "in a bucket", in the said case)?)
657.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
> super tech nerds "Resourceful"?
658.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
> they only get infinite scroll (Actually, sometimes the "paged" interface in "infinite scrolling" systems is available, only hidden. There for the benefit of people like us, those who would find it and exploit it.)
659.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
> Should prevent age verification It won't, become some parties are proposing a narrative of "shielding the innocent from harmful content" (such as themselves). keir starmer seems to suppose nudity would be indecent, aga
660.
by mdp2021 4mo ago
> How is restricting access to specific age groups fundamentally different from restricting access to cigarettes or alcohol? Restricting access to the latter does not impact privacy.

More ›