qsera

57 ms·

931.
by qsera 8mo ago
If someone ask "Hey how do I do this thing in python programming language" what are the chances that you will try to make up a solution, if you have never tried to learn Python? Just tell me..
932.
by qsera 8mo ago
You win! Good day!
933.
by qsera 8mo ago
>Have you? I haven't, and that is why I am not making higher-than-you, virtuous claims about how I would act in that situation. Maybe you should do the same. >Your ridiculous analogy doesn't even apply to the US, one of the
934.
by qsera 8mo ago
Because if it was in the right direction, then it would have been possible to amend its knowledge without going through the whole re-training procedure.
935.
by qsera 8mo ago
Have you ever gone through a whole a week without eating anything? Have you seen your kids go through that? If don't, then I will have to say you got no idea about what you are talking about..
936.
by qsera 8mo ago
Learn? Can you learn to live without eating? Do you know what happens when an economy collapse?
937.
by qsera 8mo ago
Yes, we are on the same page, and you have got one question to answer. Make your call.
938.
by qsera 8mo ago
>What does objectivity have to do with the value of x? It does not have anything to do with objectivity. I thought it to be futile to discuss that since, as you implied, predicting future can't be 100% objective, and thus decisions
939.
by qsera 8mo ago
Imagine you are stranded in your home with all your loved ones, and you get a call from your "warmonger" president and the matter is urgent; he says "We have received intel regarding a enemy plan to bomb your house in 30 mins
940.
by qsera 8mo ago
Sure, any one can say anything. But I am not referring to that. I am talking about a case where it is objectively true. But I think that is a question that anyone would rather not consider. The issue is that if you don't consider that
941.
by qsera 8mo ago
Yes, but it takes time. Like we have solar now. People talk about how it saves environment. But I think another similar win would be reduction in dependency on oil, and countries won't have to go to war over oil. But it takes time... B
942.
by qsera 8mo ago
>It is therefore scientific to think we could build machines on similar principles that exhibit intelligence as an emergent property of the system. Sure, but this ain't it. Actually, I think LLMs are a step in the wrong direction if
943.
by qsera 8mo ago
>But don't tell me you can be so naive as to believe that the U.S. military is a defensive I am not. Every country is corrupt, and war makes a lot of money for powerful people, but does it justify sabotaging your own existence?
944.
by qsera 8mo ago
If the country wage wars for bad reasons, that is another problem that probably should be fixed elsewhere, or you should leave that country and be somewhere who government you can fully get behind. > defending your country I am afraid th
945.
by qsera 8mo ago
>refuse to let their systems be used for war.. I don't want wars. But tell me, what would you like your country to do when conflicts arise due to want of natural resources? Would you want your country to just give up that resource y
946.
by qsera 8mo ago
No no, you don't understand. People can misunderstand. But they will not, for example, proceed to drive a car as if they have attended driving lessons when they have not. They might misremember, but they can know, for sure, if they hav
947.
by qsera 8mo ago
You are worried about THAT? How about we carry a device with multiple cameras, multiple microphones, and 24x7 connection to the internet that is running an operating system made by an Ad Company, to the most private of places?
948.
by qsera 8mo ago
> For now this challenge is text only. That is like saying, "My program is better than any human, but binary inputs only!".. Even restricted to text, the LLMs are not better than a human who is expert in a domain. Try talking t
949.
by qsera 8mo ago
That is why I said it is hard to spot an souless painting. >if someone told you a joke and you thought it was funny, then they told you it was from an LLM, would it stop being funny. No. It wouldn't. But they can't generate fun
950.
by qsera 8mo ago
Ah another article that implies the inevitable AI apocalypse disguised as a thought piece!
951.
by qsera 8mo ago
No, can't apply the same reasoning to software, because the other is art, and hence tied to emotion, taste etc.
952.
by qsera 8mo ago
>Me labeling "authentic" it or not should not affect it's artistic value. The problem with automated imitation generators is that they can produce thousands of painting that imitate Van Gogh, but does not have the same s
953.
by qsera 8mo ago
>does it work, is it fast enough.. Isn't the problem right now the vibe coded sotware does not appear to meet these requirements?
954.
by qsera 8mo ago
>Real humans hallucinate.. You seem to have a different understanding of what it means in the context of neural networks. Real humans will not make up non existent api and implement a solution with it, (unless they do it on purpose).
955.
by qsera 8mo ago
This is already available on online shops.
956.
by qsera 8mo ago
> most of our work is a small bit of novelty against boiler plate redundant code... Care to share some examples that prove your point?
957.
by qsera 8mo ago
People don't hallucinate. That is they can pretty reliably assess if they know or don't know something.
958.
by qsera 8mo ago
I didn't mean it is a one to one mapping from tokens. But instead it might be mapping a corpus of input text to some points in some multi dimensional space, (just like the input data a linear regression), then then it just extends the
959.
by qsera 8mo ago
I didn't understand. Can you clarify?
960.
by qsera 8mo ago
When it stops hallucinating without explicit checks for that!

More ›