HackerTrans
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

bearseascape

no profile record

Submissions

Model Spec Midtraining: Improving How Alignment Training Generalizes

alignment.anthropic.com
2 points·by bearseascape·قبل شهرين·0 comments

Following the Text Gradient at Scale (2025)

ai.stanford.edu
9 points·by bearseascape·قبل شهرين·1 comments

Transformers Are Inherently Succinct (2025)

arxiv.org
62 points·by bearseascape·قبل شهرين·9 comments

Slople – Can you tell real ML papers from AI-generated ones?

ml5885.github.io
3 points·by bearseascape·قبل 3 أشهر·1 comments

Benchmarking Culture

argmin.net
1 points·by bearseascape·قبل 4 أشهر·0 comments

Why one small American town won't stop stoning its residents to death

archiveofourown.org
2 points·by bearseascape·قبل 6 أشهر·1 comments

The most complex model we understand [video]

youtube.com
2 points·by bearseascape·قبل 7 أشهر·0 comments

Weird Generalization and Inductive Backdoors: New Ways to Corrupt LLMs

arxiv.org
1 points·by bearseascape·قبل 7 أشهر·0 comments

comments

bearseascape
·قبل 3 أشهر·discuss
I was inspired by https://slop.zackg.me/, which does the same thing for PL papers but with entire fully generated AI papers (i.e. LaTeX-rendered PDFs and all) - check it out! I thought it was fun to play, and wanted a version for ML, so made this website.

It's set up with a GitHub Actions cron job so that every day there are 5 real arXiv papers and 5 Claude-generated ones, and you try to guess which are real or fake from just the title and abstract.

Ironically, most of this was vibe coded with Claude Code. The exception is the UI, which uses Tufte CSS.
bearseascape
·قبل 6 أشهر·discuss
> What counts as research?

You might be aware of this, but most big tech companies (i.e. the ones with massive user counts) don't just let you roll out UI changes to everyone, because they know that this has a downstream impact on users. So they often A/B test those things, which is literally an experiment: you randomize who sees what, measure outcomes, and ship whatever wins. There are many data scientists employed in industry to set up and analyze experiments like this.

Also, it seems clear that this not harmless research. Everyone is aware of the effect social media has on our mental health (see the under-16 social media ban in Australia). Facebook definitely knows this, e.g. 2014 there was a big controversy over their News Feed “emotional contagion” study, where they altered what content people saw to measure changes in sentiment, without meaningful informed consent [1][2].

> Also I would like an example of something a social media company does that you wouldn't be able to get approval to do on animals. That claim sounds ridiculous.

This misses the main point: the issue is that for these experiments (and they are experiments) there is often no independent approval mechanism in the first place. Facebook, after receiving backlash, does have privacy/integrity/safety teams now which review these experiments, they are far from being independent third parties.

[1] [https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/06/every...](https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/06/every...) [2] [https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/scicurious/main-result-face...](https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/scicurious/main-result-face...)
bearseascape
·قبل 6 أشهر·discuss
A parody of a fictional New Yorker article, in which journalist Isaac Chotiner grills the administrator from Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery" about the civic benefits of ritual stoning.