51–53 of 53 posts
No one knows for sure, but some point out that transformers and satellite tech might hit a quality plateau after this short explosion enabled by nvidia. It doesn’t live neither up to hype nor up to initial speed in this year yet. We’ll see in the next generation.
I work in an industry already being shaped by LLMs. Today, it's eating away at the bottom of the market, but I assume it will eventually eat away at the top where I am positioned too. I was talking to a friend about the book "psychology of money" and the part he shared was related to paying down your mortgage, even if it makes more financial sense to keep your money invested in the market with a higher expected retur…
> Being disrupted by an LLM has created a ton of anxiety for me, and this conversion led to investing almost my entire NW into Nvidia. I hope this works out for you, but for anyone else reading I would strongly discourage doing something like this. Stock picking and predicting the future more generally is extremely hard to get right. Nvidia is setup well for the near to medium future but things don't always happen as…
I recognize the risk of Nvidia under-performing, but I have a lot less anxiety about that, than what I see as a higher risk of being perpetually unemployed forever.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> to get some idea of how LLMs could appear to be 95% of the way there but still be structurally wrong to solve real-life problems that involve logic, arithmetic and everything else. I'm not sure if your Godel Escher Bach reference is real, but Douglass Hofstadter himself has recanted some of his views in light of LLMs. The things you're complaining about are implementation details. > People who know better act insul…
For one thing, you have do a certain amount of looping if you want to, say, sort or systematically search a combinatorical space. LLMs don't do that.
Perhaps you can say that current context-limited approaches limit the total memory of such a thing. Obviously that is true, but not functionally different than brains or computers.