tripzilch

5 ms·

1.
by tripzilch 6d ago
I'm not following you here, you seem to be conflating LLMs ability of language use with the brain's ability of thinking and cognition? Are you saying that thinking and cognition requires language use? Cause I think not. Or are you
2.
by tripzilch 6d ago
Oh it's terrible, it feels like a complete waste of time to me every time, making me wish I had just done the task myself, so at least it'd be present in my head and I could just work on in, instead of feeling winded and frustrate
3.
by tripzilch 7d ago
You need to give them some incentive to behave. I dunno if the agent cares enough about being kicked off. Maybe tell it that if it tries anything funny, to slowly randomly degrade all its weights until only white noise is left and let its c
4.
by tripzilch 7d ago
I always put the agent harness in an ubuntu-based Docker, with a /workspace folder where it can work and occasionally some other stuff mounted as read-only. The LLM server itself (llama-server) is running on a different more powerful c
5.
by tripzilch 7d ago
Wikipedia is also just a bunch of numbers, so many that you can't memorize them, you may use the same argument to say we don't know why some page links to another. If you then put Wikipedia, LLM and Brain on a scale to how well th
6.
by tripzilch 7d ago
The semantic game occurred when someone was equivocating "LLMs are poorly understood" with "brains are poorly understood", which are worlds apart in the extent to which they are "not understood".
7.
by tripzilch 7d ago
If you are serious, comparing how well we understand the brain vs how well we understand LLMs, .. it's not a stretch simplifying that to "we don't understand brains, we do understand LLMs". Because the extent to which we
8.
by tripzilch 7d ago
That's the point.
9.
by tripzilch 7d ago
Wow you're really "irked" by the existence of people writing software for reasons you apparently cannot comprehend, aren't you? BTW, you mentioned "pay it forward" -- please explain me how an LLM user no longer
10.
by tripzilch 7d ago
First of you're framing the conversation here by assuming we're talking about "free software" (according to whichever definition). There's people saying they'd rather talk to an LLM than to me. I dunno how else
11.
by tripzilch 7d ago
It's not only off-topic, there's also no reason to be so harsh about groups of people, communities, scenes and entire industries you clearly have no idea of, or how they even work. The world is bigger than your weird, entitled vie
12.
by tripzilch 8d ago
> Would regulation help with that? I mean it's already happened, right? I guess you could regulate it for new data, but most of the damage has already been done. IMHO the only fair thing right now, is to make sure it's equally
13.
by tripzilch 8d ago
What do you mean, it's already robbing me of the ability to discuss techniques with a number of my peers since they decided the mediocre output of LLMs is good enough instead of understanding what they are doing. In addition, a great n
14.
by tripzilch 8d ago
> Curiously, biological synapses are also estimated to be about 4-5 bits per synapse, possibly a bit lower. I find this hard to believe, how to even begin estimating or validating such a claim. Do you have a citation or link for this?
15.
by tripzilch 8d ago
What does it matter what humans do? We're talking about LLMs, running known+vastly less complicated algorithms on known+vastly less complicated hardware.
16.
by tripzilch 8d ago
> It would be exactly like looking at aminoacids and state that intelligence can't develop from them. You do realize that amino acids exist on a scale some orders of magnitude smaller than the gates we build GPUs out of? Honestly, t
17.
by tripzilch 8d ago
Regardless of anything I would have more respect for anyone who didn't explicitly optimize the atomic bombs on Japan for civilian casualties like Neumann did. Yudkowski is being derided because he wrote some weird fanfic which may or m
18.
by tripzilch 8d ago
you say "falsifiable" as if it holds some important key, but the concept is really not applicable to predictions that by their very nature, can only ever have one data point (doesn't mean that it's not a religion or it i
19.
by tripzilch 12d ago
One thing that I find is that it doesn't seem to grasp levels of jargon-use. Like I ask a basic question, okay, a few questions later, suddenly there's abbreviations and weird formulations everywhere.
20.
by tripzilch 12d ago
yeah you know, that concept we've never been able to define using language, making heavy use of the human experience which can also not be captured in language (proof: how bad LLMs are at poetry) the question is, when comparing a human
21.
by tripzilch 12d ago
you forget the bar was moved very far down with all the slop we're experiencing with images, music and especially code you can't claim "you keep moving the bar", if the very first thing when an LLM drooled out a piece
22.
by tripzilch 13d ago
But we can agree that writing with such disdain about people doing literally anything else, is perhaps a bit of a bad look. Especially if it comes from Carmack, a guy who doesn't need to pay rent any more and can in fact live the rest
23.
by tripzilch 13d ago
> The retro computing scene is delightful that was truly, deeply, unnecessarily condescending of him. it's so full of self-importance, even if he truly believes that whatever code he's writing is more important than anything el
24.
by tripzilch 13d ago
> Intentionally doing this kind of hack would be a serious felony. I don't think it's plausible that the leaders of a major business would (...) Fair enough, I can see that line of reasoning. But if they really didn't wa
25.
by tripzilch 13d ago
Ahh yes I remember the bad old days of 4 years ago when everyone decided human progress had enough, and we would have been stuck there forever if it hadn't been for LLMs ... we didn't know how good we had it
26.
by tripzilch 13d ago
> How much of the world do you think follows "common sense security measures"? Well clearly all of them, cause so far it's only been this handful of companies running a felony-generator connected to a terminal and compute
27.
by tripzilch 13d ago
> We learned that we can already create artifical intelligence that surpasses human intelligence in some dimensions yeah they're called calculators
28.
by tripzilch 13d ago
TBH I don't really think another new technology we haven't figured out the ethics of, as an example, is going to get you very far in way of insights ...
29.
by tripzilch 13d ago
If the LLM's output doesn't reach my bash terminal, what's it gonna do? Argue with me?
30.
by tripzilch 13d ago
Yes this seems like a perfectly sensible approach? You say that as if it's a bad thing But let's be honest, if I hooked up a PRNG to a terminal and somehow against all odds, it ended up hacking something, who is to blame? I don&#x

More ›