smokel

18시간 전discuss

It's shorthand for showing that you live in a bubble.

There are very few sites such as Hacker News around. Looking for one that is similar in quality, but with a slightly different focus is going to be disappointing.

Perhaps it helps to consider why you'd exactly want this? You may be better off not visiting any such site, and instead focus on real human-in-the-loop activities with a group of local hackers.

smokel

3일 전discuss

  for x in 1611.02731 1511.06391 1811.06965 1512.03385 1511.07122 1704.01212 1409.2329 1512.02595 1706.01427 1410.5401 1806.01822 1706.03762 1409.0473 1506.03134 2001.08361 1405.6903 1603.05027 math/0406077; do curl -fL https://arxiv.org/pdf/$x -o ${x##*/}.pdf; done
  for u in https://www.cs.toronto.edu/~hinton/absps/colt93.pdf https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2012/file/c399862d3b9d6b76c8436e924a68c45b-Paper.pdf https://www.vetta.org/documents/Machine_Super_Intelligence.pdf https://www.lirmm.fr/~ashen/kolmbook-eng-scan.pdf https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=762 https://karpathy.github.io/2015/05/21/rnn-effectiveness/ https://colah.github.io/posts/2015-08-Understanding-LSTMs/ https://nlp.seas.harvard.edu/annotated-transformer/ https://cs231n.github.io/; do curl -fLO "$u"; done

smokel

6일 전discuss

The GitHub page clearly states that it is reverse engineered.

Even if you rewrite an article in your own words, you cannot claim copyright for that. At least, not to my knowledge.

smokel

6일 전discuss

You cannot claim authorship of something that you were not even allowed to take in the first place. How would you then allow rights to somebody else?

Seems pretty obvious to me.

smokel

6일 전discuss

It does make a difference. If this text was generated by the LLM, then by those same terms you are allowed to publish the data. But given that it is reverse engineered, you are not allowed to do so.

Note that even in the normal case, there are restrictions. You'd have to validate that the generated output is not copyrighted. Which in this case may not be trivial.

smokel

6일 전discuss

Can't have a discussion on art and cats without mentioning Louis Wain [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Wain

smokel

6일 전discuss

If this is regular output of the LLM, I'm not sure, but given that the author proclaims that this is reverse engineered, then they are not allowed to redistribute it under their own license terms. The terms of service are also pretty clear on this not being allowed, which makes it extra hard to defend (section 3.3):

> You may not access or use, or help another person to access or use, our Services in the following ways:

...

3. To decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, or otherwise reduce our Services to human-readable form, except when these restrictions are prohibited by applicable law. [1]

[1] https://www.anthropic.com/legal/consumer-terms

smokel

6일 전discuss

> Open source, MIT licensed.

I don't think that is how copyright licensing works.

smokel

9일 전discuss

Most interesting things in software engineering are (laughably) subjective.

Just check out any conversation on dynamic vs static typing, talk to a Rust zealot, or ask a backend engineer if microservices were a mistake.

It's unfortunate, and it makes it hard to have proper discussions on these subjects. It would be worthwhile to figure out how we can have more constructive arguments.

smokel

10일 전discuss

It is a Python thing, in the sense that it is Python-inspired:

> design-wise copy the Python standard library's APIs whenever possible [1]

[1] https://github.com/jpakkane/pystd

smokel

14일 전discuss

This may have been the case one year ago, but with contemporary models such as Opus, I run into this less often.

smokel

16일 전discuss

I don't buy the article's title "Why big AI labs are hiring so many philosophers". They probably just hire one or two, and hundreds of software engineers.

I always found it somewhat annoying that a philosophy study would present itself by stating that graduated philosophers have great job opportunities, implying that studying philosophy would not be a bad choice. It just attracts really smart people, and these tend to find a job more easily. This article seems to make the same kind of mistake.

Also, for all we know these imagined herds of philosophers at AI firms are just labelling pictures of dogs.

smokel

16일 전discuss

> solve our hardest math problems

We're not quite there yet :)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_m...

smokel

18일 전discuss

Being able to drive a car properly also depends on having the right exploration-exploitation balance. A three-year-old is likely to explore too much in a situation where mistakes can be dangerous.

This requires not only knowledge, but also the control systems that develop with the prefrontal cortex. LLMs don't do much control yet.

smokel

21일 전discuss

18446744073709551616 possible values and you can't spare 1 for null? :)

TIL that Rust has NonZeroU64 which you can combine with Optional to get the required behaviour with only 64 bits per entry. [1]

[1] https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/num/type.NonZeroU64.html

smokel

26일 전discuss

If humans did actual reasoning, then why is this particular discussion failing so hard?

smokel

26일 전discuss

I don't think that is what the parent said, but I'm afraid my comment was too snarky (apologies), and the audience in this thread is not eager to be changed in their beliefs. Thanks for taking the time to reply though.

LLMs are fed a lot of data, and there are many patterns in there, including reasoning and some logic. Adding a little domain specific data will not immediately learn that domain, but it will also not be limited to only that data in its reasoning.

smokel

26일 전discuss

What would happen if you also feed it a book or two on logic, and some books on mathematics and physics?

smokel

27일 전discuss

> The path to AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) must never be enclosed by high walls. We have always believed that AGI should be the cornerstone for all of humanity to collaboratively explore the boundaries of intelligence and solve complex challenges, rather than a privilege monopolized by a few rules and subject to revocation at any moment.

This is not obvious to me. If everyone gets access to AGI, but only a few people have the means to do really bad things with it, then what is the difference? Might as well make clear from the start that AGI is a powerful tool (read: weapon), and not a solution (e.g. world peace).

Submissions

Tell HN: OpenAI silently removed Study Mode from ChatGPT

TU Delft sets national record with largest human pi symbol

CodeSpeak: A next-generation programming language powered by LLMs

Stochastic Processes and SDEs

[untitled]

comments