Viewing profile — FishInTheWater

If your "proof" can't port to Humans then it's not proof Learn to take a hint. I'm not going to argue this on human terms because you're playing a dumb um-akshually game. Computer …

It's an impressive result, but shouldn't be seen as "correction". Framing it as a (drastic) reduction in mistakes is more useful here. If the model is productionized (read: dumbed …

Humans provide increasingly wrong answers as questions get more complex too. Human this, Human that. LLMs aren't humans. "My model is crap but the human brain isn't very good at th…

This is where the terminology becomes a bit annoying, but there is a key difference in the kinds of reasoning at work here. When you ask LLMs to provide a reasoning, the actual rea…

You're missing the point, there is a difference; The answers are often wrong, and more-wrong the more complex the question gets. They're only able to answer simple (relative-to-the…

Given a set of instructions, an instruction fine-tuned/aligned LLM is able (conditional on size and training quality) to reason through a set of steps to produce a desired output. …

This is setting the bar way too high. No. If these things are claimed to be sources of truth, then the bar needs to be that high. It is precisely because people don't fact-check th…

The issue with them is that it's not simply "looking at oneself". If you were using divination for that purposes then it's no issue. Harmless superstition is fine. But things like …

That's the trick. It's about feelings of certainty, not actual measurable reproduceable predictions. Most long-lived divination methods are very vague. Anything providing concrete …

You're assuming here that there has to be "real" value at the root. This isn't really true. Astrology, Tarot, the I Ching, or any other kind of divination all serve the same purpos…

A transformer can only memorize , it doesn't learn to do . For what that concerns us here: LLMs will never learn to fact-check anything. They'll blindly regurgitate the facts they …

your rules will have not objective justification, and will be based on the personal philosophies of those in charge. The "objective" safety standards are often a lot more philosoph…

All this under the auspices of "ethics", which as a reminder, is just an arbitrary set of rules which someone is trying to pass off as having a divine origin. They are arbitrary on…

For personal ethics, they are mere opinion as you get to choose what those ethics are. For professional ethics, those ethics are the opinions of the relevant professional associati…

Remember that database rights are a thing. One cannot hold copyright facts, but one can "copyright" a collection of facts like a search index or a map.

"Living History" is a well crafted written experience, not procedurally generated slop. The issue here is that LLMs can only act in-character if the world has already been built an…

But it isn't different. People have been using things like Markov chains to experiment with NPC dialogue for well over a decade. It just never got widespread adoption because it's …

The fun part is that the GDPR already does. The answer is you're not allowed to use personal data for AI . (And "personal data" here covers things like all public social media post…

The entire fair use claim is derived not from any legal basis, but rather, that "it has to be fair use" because it would be legally catastrophic for OpenAI et al if it weren't true…

It's not so much about formal logic, but general predictability. even with formally composable languages like JavaScript, a semblance of unpredictability — akin to the "faerie logi…

but you can tune your prompts so that 100% of the time they give you a valid result in the result You can't though, that's the issue. Illustrative here are tokens like "SolidGoldMa…

Prompt "engineering" is just writing prayers to forest faeries. Whilst BASIC/JavaScript/etc are all magic incantations to a child, a child will soon figure out there's underlaying …

> What a tricky problem to solve at scale because of the tragedy of the commons (As in; "I'm sure someone - not me - will be a sponsor for this project") We have solutions for trag…