shkkmo

12 ms·

151.
by shkkmo 1y ago
> PoW increases the cost for the bots which is great. But not by any meaningful amount as explained in the article. All it actually does is rely on it's obscurity while interfering with legitimate use.
152.
by shkkmo 1y ago
> Stop whining about free projects/labour man. The same people comment oh well these AI scrapers are scraping so many websites and taking livelihood of website makers and now you have someone who just gave it to ya for free and you
153.
by shkkmo 1y ago
> unless fertility rates markedly change. Which seems highly likely. Fertility rates change far faster than they influence population demographics. > It's extremely biased, and religiosity is one of the most predictive factors. I
154.
by shkkmo 1y ago
Not really, if you look at the actual birth rates, it maps to economic success more than religious identity. Yes, we all know that global population growth is mainly happening in Africa and other poor countries. You also cite global retenti
155.
by shkkmo 1y ago
Your understanding of the statistics is lacking. A 84% reproductive cultural "replacement rate" means that in order to maintain the population protestants need to have an average of 2.38 (2/0.84) kids to have the same number
156.
by shkkmo 1y ago
> Honestly, claiming DeepMind is still some scrappy London-based startup is quite unfortunate :/ Since I didn't do that, I'm not sure how that is relevant or productive. > work is, in practical and legal senses, U.S.-ba
157.
by shkkmo 1y ago
It's not just the HQ, the only AI researcher I know personally is an American who moved to London to work on AI with DeepMind well after the acquisition.
158.
by shkkmo 1y ago
> As GP said, you can take this both ways. You can, but one of those ways is objectively worse for the reasons explained in this thread and in the article. When you have to read a query out of order to understand it then something is wro
159.
by shkkmo 1y ago
Your approach only works with massive assumptions about the structure of the data or a very simplistic data structure. SELECT statments don't just use table names, they can use aliases for those table names, views, subqueries, etc. The
160.
by shkkmo 1y ago
> It's actually very funny to me that you are stating these definitions so authoritatively despite the terms not having any sort if rigor attached to either their definition or usage. Huh? My entire point was that AI and AGI are loo
161.
by shkkmo 1y ago
> I've never seen someone state, as fact, that LLMs are AGI before now. Then you probably haven't been paying attention. https://deepmind.google/research/publications/66938/ > I've never
162.
by shkkmo 1y ago
People who are certain that computers can't replicate human level intelligence aren't being intellectually rigourous. The same applies to people who are certain computers can replicate human level intelligence. We can make argumen
163.
by shkkmo 1y ago
AI and AGI are broad umbrella terms. Stuff like Alpha Zero is AI but not AGI while LLMs are both. Engaging in semantic battles to try to change the meanings of those terms is just going to create more confusion, not less. Instead why not us
164.
by shkkmo 1y ago
AI has had many, many lay meanings over the years. Simplistic decision trees and heuristics for video games is called AI. It is a loose term and trying to apply it with semantic rigour is useless, as is trying to tell people that it should
165.
by shkkmo 1y ago
Alpha Zero is not trying to be AGI. > The premise that an AI needs to do Y "as we do" to be good at X because humans use Y to be good at X needs closer examination. I don't see it being used as a premise. It see it as spec
166.
by shkkmo 1y ago
If you stereotype the people who disagree with you, you'll have a very hard time understanding their actual arguments.
167.
by shkkmo 1y ago
> When the benchmark changes, you should ask 'why.' The article goes into detail about why the poverty line changed. You must have skimmed past the secrion titled "How the World Bank sets the International Poverty Line&quo
168.
by shkkmo 1y ago
>Facebook did not make a conscious decision to process this data. Yes, it did. When Facebook built the system and allowed external entities to feed it unvetted information without human oversight, that was a choice to process this data.
169.
by shkkmo 1y ago
> I see the current situation a weakening of copyright law, a massive one. And not for the average joe, but instead for the most commercial of entities. You gonna have to explain this in more detail because it isn't clear to me how
170.
by shkkmo 1y ago
> 1. Anything that already exists, the universe is able to construct I didn't claim it is possible we couldn't build meat brains. I claimed it is possible that equivalent or better performance might only be obtainable by meats
171.
by shkkmo 1y ago
> other parts of copyright law, at least where I live, view "for profit copying" and "some dude wanting to print out a webpage" entirely different. I don't know what your jurisdiction is however through treaties,
172.
by shkkmo 1y ago
> Because meat isn't magic. Anything that can be computed inside your physical body, can be calculated in an "artificially" constructed replica That is a big assumption and my doubts aren't based on any soul "mag
173.
by shkkmo 1y ago
> But if they take it, then package it, then make money? That is different But still, also legal. You can't copyright a recipe itself, just the fluff around it. It is totally legal for somone to visit a bunch of recipe blogs, copy t
174.
by shkkmo 1y ago
> If LLM fell to tricks of Elizabet Loftus, we'd say LLM hallucinated. She's strongly oversold how and when false memories can be created. She testified in defense of Ghislaine Maxwell at her 2021 trial that financial incentive
175.
by shkkmo 1y ago
> I think your concerns are legit, but it's not necessarily the reviewer's fault that they're on three deadlines and don't have the time to give your product the care and concern it deserves. It's probably the ed
176.
by shkkmo 1y ago
> Ultimately, you shipped a broken product. They shipped a working product that failed after several months, was covered under warranty and also repairavle at home (which the review doesn't even mention.) > It is perfectly fair f
177.
by shkkmo 1y ago
This seems like a big assumption to make since that isn't the reasoning presented in the review. > I understand why I need to check a dashboard for an outdoor air quality monitor, but having to check a dashboard for an indoor monito
178.
by shkkmo 1y ago
I guess you didn't tead the review, because that isn't what happened > After using the monitor for a few months, the display began to fall apart into unreadable characters.
179.
by shkkmo 1y ago
Seems about right, my new laptop has 8x that which is a about the same ratio that my last new laptop had to my phone at the time.
180.
by shkkmo 1y ago
I'm pretty sure giving nukes to Taiwan would be seen as an act of war by China.

More ›