HackerTrans
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

elicksaur

no profile record

comments

elicksaur
·पिछला वर्ष·discuss
The crypto token “liquidity” feels off.

Do accredited investor regulations not apply to this market? Is the crypto token a registered security since it apparently represents stock in a company?

I’m turned off because it sounds like the company wants to play fast and loose with money in a way that is more than just “move fast and break things”.
elicksaur
·पिछला वर्ष·discuss
There are ignorant people everywhere. There are brilliant people everywhere.

Governments should be criticized when they do bad things. In America, you can talk openly about things you don’t like that the government has done. In China, you can’t. I know which one I’d rather live in.
elicksaur
·पिछला वर्ष·discuss
Weird to see straight up Chinese propaganda on HN, but it’s a free platform in a free country I guess.

Try posting an opposite dunking on China on a Chinese website.
elicksaur
·2 वर्ष पहले·discuss
Sure, that’s essentially what a person would do. Describing that process says nothing about what an LLM does, which we know by definition of the system is applying a set of weights to a text string input.

If you want to reduce all reasoning to just math, then LLMs reason. But then saying something like the OP of “we’ve made computers that reason” is not very novel or useful. Under that framework, computers always reasoned.

Does ChatGPT even “solve” this problem? How do you know it’s not in the training data? Example of a tutorial for making a watermelon in css from 2017: https://dev.to/munamohamed94/easy-css-watermelon-slice-anima...
elicksaur
·2 वर्ष पहले·discuss
Can you explain it with reasoning?

The explanation without is that the LLM takes the prompt text, applies a math formula to produce the next token, iterates that function to get a set of tokens, and returns the response. Where is there reasoning?

If that is sufficient for reasoning, is my calculator reasoning when I input 2+2 and it returns 4?
elicksaur
·2 वर्ष पहले·discuss
Yeah, I agree! Knowing how people respond, I thought it was useful to add the full context of the breadth and depth of the author’s writing. Already there’s people pulling single line quotes to dismiss. But, that’s pretty typical of the internet.
elicksaur
·2 वर्ष पहले·discuss
Important context, this appears to be a brief intro+table of contents for a 165-page pdf/html book.[0]

It’ll probably be easy for HN to take potshots at snippets of the intro, but the writing intrigued me enough that I want to at least skim over the whole thing.

[0] pdf link for reference, but the html navigation seems pretty clean in the OP link as well. https://situational-awareness.ai/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/...
elicksaur
·3 वर्ष पहले·discuss
“Aware of” does not necessarily mean “capable of dealing with”. Forensics is generally bad science, yet gets admitted into court all the time. This occurs despite many legal textbooks, papers, and court opinions highlighting the deficiencies.