xpe

32 ms·

451.
by xpe 1y ago
I have found zero demonization in the source material (the NIST article). Here is the sense I'm using: "To represent as evil or diabolic: wartime propaganda that demonizes the enemy." [1] If you disagree, please point to a
452.
by xpe 1y ago
> I urge everyone to go read the original report and _then_ to read this analysis and make up their own mind. Step away from the clickbait, go read the original report. >> TLDR for others... Facepalm.
453.
by xpe 1y ago
The author, Eric Hartford, wrote: > Strip away the inflammatory language Where is the claimed inflammatory language? I've read the report. It is dry, likely boring to many.
454.
by xpe 1y ago
> While I agree this report is BS and xenophobic Examples please? Can you please share where you see BS and/or xenophobia in the original report? Or are you basing your take only on Hartford's analysis? But not even Hartford
455.
by xpe 1y ago
Of course there will be some degree of governmental and/or political influence. The question is not if but where and to what extent. No one should proclaim "bullshit" and wave off this entire report as "biased" or u
456.
by xpe 1y ago
Please don't just read Eric Hartford's piece. Start with the key findings from the source material: "CAISI Evaluation of DeepSeek AI Models Finds Shortcomings and Risks" [1]. Here are the single-sentence summaries:
457.
by xpe 1y ago
People. Who has taken the time to read the original report? You are smarter than believing at face value the last thing you heard. Come on.
458.
by xpe 1y ago
Here is my take. When people use the stochastic parrots phrase, very often they use it as an explanation of what is happening. But in many cases, I don't think they appreciate: (1) good explanations must be testable models ; (2) dif
459.
by xpe 1y ago
> I'm in the stochastic parrot camp. If you wouldn't mind doing me a favor?... For a few minutes, can we avoid this phrase? I don't know what people really mean by it.* Can you in plain English translate your view into sen
460.
by xpe 1y ago
> We simply do not have the technology yet to handle text and images in a consistent way! We actually have plenty of algorithms for laying out text and images very quickly. You can see this when scrolling complex PDFs or sizable books on
461.
by xpe 1y ago
> My skepticism of AI safety is just because of skepticism of AI generally. These are amazing things, but I don't believe the technology is even a road to AGI. Thanks for your response. I'm curious how to state your claim in a
462.
by xpe 1y ago
> There's a reason it can give a chess move when prompted and explain all the rules and notation, but can't actually play chess: it's not in the training data. I don't understand how you can claim an LLM can't pl
463.
by xpe 1y ago
Yes, recognizing reality and the incentive structure is powerful. Then one can make smart tradeoffs. Most people want to stay in apparent alignment with their employer to advance. But sometimes perfect alignment isn’t optimal for what you w
464.
by xpe 1y ago
> if you use Perplexity, they also have a news tab with the exact feature set "Exact" is far from accurate. I just did a side-by-side comparison. To name only two obvious differences: A. At the top level, Perplexity has a &quot
465.
by xpe 1y ago
> The entire value/fact dichotomy that the announcement bases itself on Hmmm. Here I will quote some representative sections from the announcement [1]: >> News is broken. We all know it, but we’ve somehow accepted it as inevit
466.
by xpe 1y ago
> It's just impossible to summarize any text without imparting some sort of value judgement on it, therefore "biasing" the text Unfortunately, the above is nearly a cliché at this point. The phrase "value judgment&quo
467.
by xpe 1y ago
I welcome any substantive commentary and disagreement, as always. I’m happy to stray outside the herd. HN needs more clearly articulated disagreement regarding AI regulation. I made my comment in response to what seemed like a simplistic, i
468.
by xpe 1y ago
The commenter’s profile indicates they work for a major AI development companies — where being against AI regulation aligns nicely with one’s paycheck. See also the the scare quotes around AI safety. We all have heard the dogma: regulation
469.
by xpe 1y ago
There are many ways. One would be to find your people and talk about your goals and find people who can help you and you can help. Another is find a community you want to serve. Instilling such values is easier when people are young and not
470.
by xpe 1y ago
And cosmic rays could cause bit flips, causing a patient record to have an undetectable error, leading to a surgeon removing the wrong kneecap. I’m exaggerating to make a point here. If one builds a threat model, one can better allocate one
471.
by xpe 1y ago
I don’t know where to start with the comment above. First, different code bases receive different levels of scrutiny, so factor this in. Second, there are tools that can help with supply chain security. Third, security isn’t all or nothing;
472.
by xpe 1y ago
>> I'll say it again: no one cares about security. > Readers are likely to ignore your prose or dismiss it as an uneducated rant when you make overgeneralizations. Learn how to avoid this error. Writing Commons > Argumentat
473.
by xpe 1y ago
Perhaps. Or perhaps not. What are the likely consequences when this happens? Plausible deniability might work here -- and it might even be true.
474.
by xpe 1y ago
Here is hoping the above comment isn't upvoted to the point where it is portrayed as something like a "key takeaway" from the article. That would be missing the point.
475.
by xpe 1y ago
> Somehow, we've all just accepted that it's totally normal to install tools from random strangers that can Some people do this without thinking much about it. Not all of us. This is not normal nor ok. Predicting this kind of
476.
by xpe 1y ago
Indeed front-end development in software can be painful. Much of the cruft can be attributed to computing's byzantine history of incremental experimentation. You might take some comfort in knowing that the biological analogue is vastly
477.
by xpe 1y ago
Thanks for replying. I did indeed read your message but didn’t see a connection to the thread. Please don’t blame me for being honest about how your comment conveys (to me, and likely others, too). Rather than ignoring your comment, I was o
478.
by xpe 1y ago
> This is the first step toward a more useful ChatGPT that proactively brings you what you need, helping you make more progress so you can get back to your life. “Don’t burden yourself with the little details that constitute your life, l
479.
by xpe 1y ago
Ads? That’s quaint. Think “broad-spectrum mental manipulation”.
480.
by xpe 1y ago
One starts off life with little conscious awareness of life’s big questions. If we’re lucky, we might gain some clarity about the most important questions and share what we learn with others. From evolution’s point of view, individuals are

More ›