sigbottle

8 ms·

91.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
The "singularity" as stated requires AI to either make a technological advancement strong enough to be deadly to humans (besides just intelligence), or spreading deep institutional support for itself among society. The idea that &
92.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
do world cup athletes get a big bonus for world cup participation from their govts and/or FIFA?
93.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
Bertrand Russell objected to the notion of causation in the 1900s, because merely stating the updated dynamics of a system doesn't imply causation in any grand sense. Like hume, he dismisses causation, but not because of the problem of
94.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
But you can just apply this to anything. I feel unlike unless you're an insider with skin in the game, your criticism doesn't land other than a generic surface one. To be clear, I apply an equal deep skepticism to most fields that
95.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
If humans are still around by the end of the century: previously shunned philosophical movements such as pragmatism will actually become mainstream again. The most interesting problems arise when you don't try and force one shared stan
96.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
What's the hiring space and business strategy around all of these smaller AI labs? Its really cool that people like these guys get paid to optimize models and give them out for free (open source). Do a lot of these labs have forward de
97.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
> I think the anthropomorphic view of this is dangerous in the long term as it starts the argument that anything that isn't reasoned by a human isn't reasoning at all. Something like this is actually a stance in the tradition o
98.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
If you want to take it that far, we've had results like this since the 60s (solomonoff induction). But of course if you state it like that, your (rightful) objection is that it's pretty vacuous (if I had the computational omniscie
99.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
Is the implication that human thinking is inherently inferior to the perfect, all knowing AI? Again, I find this line of thinking time and time again in the modern AI booster space. There are two ways to deal with a problem. Either deal wit
100.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
How was integration for you guys? Was the integration easier for you guys since you have an established emacs system consuming terminal output with reasoned semantics over what goes where for existing subsystems (rendering, osc codes, etc)?
101.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
Auto-vectorization is not a programming model!
102.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
There was no useful math after 1964? What? Or do you not count the entire field of computer science as math (arguably FFT belongs to computer science too)?
103.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
what kinds of proofs would it be good at? I thought that combinatorial proofs would be easier to reason over than ones that required analysis
104.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
I mean, people always say there are tradeoffs, until you reach the next frontier, in which there are tradeoffs at said frontier, and the next, and the next, etc. In one sense, yes, tradeoffs are inescapable as the scope expands to the maxim
105.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
I highly respect many people at cognition but yeah that's put a sour taste in my mouth. I want to work in the AI space on actual AI research, at any part of the stack. Even if I'm developing training infra - as long as people are
106.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
From an interoperability perspective, this breaks the advantage of LLM inference that frontier AI labs have, in that you just have everyone run through the same algorithm but configure via text. If you added probes at the model layer, you h
107.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
I mean mathematicians have encoded a decent amount of the operations you mean for messy versus true / false. Turing machines are built from mere Boolean logic, but also notions of compression, information theory, projections, function
108.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
When I disagree with the data: I will nitpick every last detail of methodology, any cross-corroboration is an anecdote, suddenly I demand a-priori levels of justification. All science is flawed anyways, it's not like mathematics, you c
109.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
Or even simpler - they can just claim to implement it but still store your data just because. Doesn't seem like government is taking any steps here to try and regulate anything anymore. Possibly not ever again.
110.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
You could redefine language to include mental abstractions and maybe it wouldn't be so weird. Language is a shared medium. Maybe an intelligence is capable of building abstractions in their head without the need for say, a symbol syste
111.
by sigbottle 3mo ago
Parse, don't validate is one way of building constraints. The issue is it feeds into a tree-based view of constraints. However it does yield the philosophy of "constraints by construction". Another is making a set of "li
112.
by sigbottle 4mo ago
Narratives are the most ungodly effective thing known to mankind, is the issue.
113.
by sigbottle 4mo ago
Chris okasaki! Was into functional data structures in college, great book and great dude
114.
by sigbottle 4mo ago
"Encoding" implies some GOFAI symbolic formal rule machinery. I'd argue that transformers are a pretty good indication that intelligence isn't "encodable" in the way we think it means. Usually, most "model
115.
by sigbottle 4mo ago
Exactly. Every single philosophical statement in history runs up against the issue where you can just say, "yeah, it's pretty much this. You just need to do <arbitrarily hard unspecified thing that is basically unfalsifiability
116.
by sigbottle 4mo ago
I think it takes a very specific kind of person to read Crime and Punishment. So, as a baseline, I think most people have or can understand internal monologues. That's not what I mean, though that is a prerequisite. But many real-life
117.
by sigbottle 4mo ago
I actually have to write some internal docs and I'm struggling to put things into words. Blogging is hard, even when stating the "obvious"!
118.
by sigbottle 4mo ago
One of these days, the strays will line up with me. Then pass me, then I will get old...
119.
by sigbottle 4mo ago
That's different though - those are services you explicitly agree to and sign up for, be it at checkout, be it at service signup time, be it because you are making a google account on the google platform. For example, a github cicd aut
120.
by sigbottle 4mo ago
To be fair, labs silently nerf models all the time. Fable's probably objectively better at full power. I mean, I definitely felt the same difference in competency between Fable and current Opus. But Opus itself has definitely been nerf

More ›