somewhereoutth

4 ms·

31.
by somewhereoutth 5mo ago
The real test would be if an LLM makes an important conjecture.
32.
by somewhereoutth 5mo ago
But it is not a real economy is it? Vast sums of money are being spent subsidizing token processing with little to no tangible business benefit for the end user. For those of us lucky enough to have the choice, the best bet is to sit it o
33.
by somewhereoutth 5mo ago
I'm also glad they have the option - and it does seem that many will take up that option. They themselves have judged that factory work is less bad than 'house' work, might be worth listening to them.
34.
by somewhereoutth 5mo ago
Right! I am currently living in a (relatively poor) Western European country that has recently experienced a tourism boom, and although the money pouring in has been nice for at least some, it has wrecked the existing social fabric in many
35.
by somewhereoutth 5mo ago
Right, however over-tourism is a real problem. Tourism provides low quality, transitory jobs, with income flowing more to wealth holders (property owners etc) than to wealth creators. It distorts property markets and sucks the oxygen out of
36.
by somewhereoutth 5mo ago
Prior to the advent of LLMs, I had this concept of the 'complexity horizon' - essentially a [hand built] software system will naturally tend to get more and more complex until no-one can understand it - until it meets the complexi
37.
by somewhereoutth 5mo ago
The entire business proposition for LLMs is that they will replace whole armies of [expensive] humans, hence justifying the biblical amount of CapEx. So of course there is strong incentive from the LLM creators to anthropomorphize them as m
38.
by somewhereoutth 5mo ago
Gambling is right. And not just the dopamine, habitual gamblers remember the wins and forget the losses, so tend to believe they are 'ahead'. In time the bean counters will come and sober everyone up, the bottom line can't be
39.
by somewhereoutth 5mo ago
Right, it was the perfect match: Humans for fuzzy touchy feely stuff, computers for hard edged correct calculations. How have we managed to screw this up so badly?
40.
by somewhereoutth 5mo ago
> When developer productivity tools become so valuable that engineers blow the entire budget in four months, the issue isn't the tool but that the budget was invented too early to forecast this adoption curve. Where oh where can I f
41.
by somewhereoutth 5mo ago
Tulips? NFTs? South Sea Bubble? Mortgage Backed Securities and derivative products (CDOs etc)? Beanie Babies?
42.
by somewhereoutth 5mo ago
Anti-Genism? Antija for short.
43.
by somewhereoutth 5mo ago
Conversely, just because an invention causes a bubble doesn't mean it is useful and world changing.
44.
by somewhereoutth 5mo ago
I believe wealth taxes (really, wealth restitution) should go into sovereign wealth funds - not least as then the public can see how that money is working for them, and so support the continuance and expansion of such taxes.
45.
by somewhereoutth 5mo ago
LLM proponents believe that these higher level encodings in latent space do in fact match the real world concepts described by our language(s). However, a much simpler explanation for what we see with LLMs is that instead the higher level e
46.
by somewhereoutth 6mo ago
depends if post-correction it is worth anyone's money to keep training new frontier models. It could be that it isn't, so we are left with models that were trained in the bubble, but are now increasingly out of date, or (open?) mo
47.
by somewhereoutth 6mo ago
I like open note exams (and perhaps open book exams, as you need to know the book well to know which page to look at) - it forces you to condense the material to the salient points and operationalise it to solve what would be more challengi
48.
by somewhereoutth 6mo ago
My understanding is that the major part of the cost of a given model is the training - so open models depend on the training that was done for frontier models? I'm finding hard to imagine (e.g.) RLHF being fundable through a free softw
49.
by somewhereoutth 6mo ago
The first 90% of this is standard set theory. I'm unclear what the last 10% of 'category theory' gives us.
50.
by somewhereoutth 6mo ago
Really not the same. Assembly / machine code is entirely deterministic - they are a notation for your thoughts. LLM produced content is more a smorgasbord of other people's thoughts, and cannot help you with clarity, conviction, e
51.
by somewhereoutth 6mo ago
and prose, and sketching. All these things (code, prose, sketching) are about thinking through making .
52.
by somewhereoutth 6mo ago
> impossible to starve this is a very low bar for determining a decent quality of life for a human being. > ideological places or jealousy but presumably you are a "temporarily embarrassed billionaire"? > billionaire is l
53.
by somewhereoutth 6mo ago
I really liked the number/name system in SF when I was living there. It was very legible, even if you didn't know the named street, you could quickly dial in to the location by scanning along the numbered street. Where I live now
54.
by somewhereoutth 6mo ago
iCloud is mostly Java (or was, about 10 years ago when I was there)
55.
by somewhereoutth 6mo ago
3. You use the act of writing code to think about a given problem, and by so doing not only produce a better code, but also gain a deeper understanding of the problem itself - in combination a better product all around.
56.
by somewhereoutth 6mo ago
Sorry yes. If an LLM written unit test fails, then it has to be determined whether the test was wrong or the code was wrong. This is an expense in human oversight, unless of course we believe that LLMs will get it right at a high enough rat
57.
by somewhereoutth 6mo ago
Unit tests very roughly double the amount of effort required to make any meaningful change to your codebase. They are also require maintenance same as ordinary code - but the customer does not care in the slightest whether or not they pass.
58.
by somewhereoutth 6mo ago
If your product is used by humans, then it needs to be tested by humans - this cannot be automated. Those humans can be your QA people, or your customers. Perhaps your customers are happy to be testers, perhaps not. Unit tests are very expe
59.
by somewhereoutth 7mo ago
My only hope is that it is such a disaster that it is effectively an extinction level event for this current technoscene (along the lines of the Permian–Triassic extinction event and others). Then we can get back to the unglamorous, boring,
60.
by somewhereoutth 7mo ago
but still so so much further to go until you reach human.

More ›