quotemstr

4 ms·

1.
by quotemstr 5d ago
Outlawed? Only in safetyist dreams
2.
by quotemstr 5d ago
These providers can also just ignore insinuations they're being "unethical" when people come to them with steering vectors in hand. Nobody has to listen to the scolds.
3.
by quotemstr 10d ago
Because P!=NP (very probably IMHO) there's a huge class of problem for which LLMs are useful on the expensive and heuristic-y generation side because the verification is relatively inexpensive.
4.
by quotemstr 11d ago
They brought it on themselves by marketing a read-for-free product
5.
by quotemstr 11d ago
They're not doing autoregression, so all the outputs are computed in one big forward pass. Very cheap.
6.
by quotemstr 11d ago
It looks like a specialized encoder-only(-ish) transformer with scalar and ordinal output heads. Acausal in effect, maybe? Probably not even autoregressive? I'd use this as a tool an LLM can use for specialized tasks. It's not AI
7.
by quotemstr 11d ago
"Stronger" is absolute bullshit. No data race prevention. No intra-object protection. Mandatory GC, and 5x the compute cost. Nothing like a statically safe language.
8.
by quotemstr 13d ago
Shame that you can't then link /proc/self/fd/N to a different node in the filesystem namespace. That'd be neat and symmetric.
9.
by quotemstr 13d ago
What are you going on about? Why shouldn't there be some temporary authorization prompt for clipboard access? You could even wire it up to control-V somehow such that the same keystroke would grant temporary access and communicate a pa
10.
by quotemstr 14d ago
No.
11.
by quotemstr 16d ago
The wheel of fashion turns once more.
12.
by quotemstr 17d ago
I don't think GitHub or any other private party gets to decide what attaches to the perjury clause. A contract can impose liabilities, but it can't create a crime out of thin air.
13.
by quotemstr 17d ago
The perjury part of the DMCA doesn't do what you (and most people) think. It attaches only to the DMCA claimant's authority to act on behalf of the copyright he's alleging is being infringed. It does not attach to the ver
14.
by quotemstr 18d ago
You don't have to quantize all layers and all dimensions uniformly, FWIW
15.
by quotemstr 18d ago
This is going to get about 0% uptake. People's preferences, as revealed by their behavior, align with the algorithmic feeds. That's the whole point of an algorithmic feed.
16.
by quotemstr 20d ago
I don't know what all that's about, but the day-to-day experience is that you can find a wide range of opinions on X and a much narrower range on alternatives. I don't think a lot of people who aren't already on these al
17.
by quotemstr 20d ago
You're not going to get many volunteers to move from a free-speech platform to a censored one. Everyone who wants the censorship is already on BlueSky or Mastodon. Part of sharing a society with people is being okay with their being ab
18.
by quotemstr 20d ago
We could never rely on scratchpad to reflect true model deliberatons.
19.
by quotemstr 20d ago
Keep in mind that LessWrong a community that 1) ostensibly wants to slow down AI so we can prepare for it, and 2) in actuality, wants to make the Bay Area EA community a kind of guild that controls everyone's use of AI. Take anything t
20.
by quotemstr 20d ago
It is the real thing. Not "almost". The actual thing. If you want to forestall accidental heap policy, make a storage policy that prohibits it.
21.
by quotemstr 20d ago
Ah. Dyno ( https://github.com/ldionne/dyno ) is good at this stuff. If you have types Base, Child1, Child2, you can just return a Dyno object that can be any of these, expressed as a tagged union and not a Box-equivale
22.
by quotemstr 20d ago
"We"? Yeah, okay, Your Highness. As for the content: the law says what it says. Where in the constitution of the United States of America and its amendments does it say that a state government must be truthful about public health
23.
by quotemstr 20d ago
Where is the constitution does it say the state can't do that?
24.
by quotemstr 20d ago
What does your explanation have to do with the fact that C++ can express by-value returns of complex objects?
25.
by quotemstr 20d ago
My question stands.
26.
by quotemstr 21d ago
Has anyone actually been charged and convicted for disclosing knowledge of a vulnerability in exchange for money with no further collusion to commit a crime?
27.
by quotemstr 21d ago
No, it wouldn't.
28.
by quotemstr 21d ago
Has anyone actually been convicted of abetting a crime by selling a vulnerability, by itself, not conspiring with the buyer to commit a crime using said vulnerability? Not as far as I can see. It would be absurd to jail someone for accurate
29.
by quotemstr 21d ago
> Blackhat markets will always be able to pay better. ... than Google? > Selling to Google though you aren't chancing jail time. Why would you go to jail for selling a vulnerability? It's free speech.
30.
by quotemstr 21d ago
You let the market decide. Google could purchase the bugs on the same market blackhats do.

More ›