41–50 of 144 posts
The biggest drawback of LLM is that it never answers with "I don't know" (unless it is some quote) and it just brings bullshit hallucinations which human has to reject as wrong. Thus it is mostly useless for anything serious. Personally I use it to beautify some text, but still have to do a bit of correction to fix b/s or missed context.
I feel like as an intro aimed at "normies" it still manages to communicate in a more abstract and overthinky way than necessary. People often find it difficult to intuit examples from abstract descriptions. BUT, people are great at intuiting abstractions from concrete examples. You rarely need to explicitly mention abstractions, in informal talk. People's minds are always abstracting. > If I’m relating the collection…
A normie's guide that references subatomic particle mechanics...
I feel like as an intro aimed at "normies" it still manages to communicate in a more abstract and overthinky way than necessary. People often find it difficult to intuit examples from abstract descriptions. BUT, people are great at intuiting abstractions from concrete examples. You rarely need to explicitly mention abstractions, in informal talk. People's minds are always abstracting. > If I’m relating the collection…
> "Translating {cat} to {at-cay}, can be managed with one “Pig Latin” rule: > If input is {cat} then output is {at-cay}." Even this can be translated further into “human-speak”: “Move the first bit of the word to the end, and add ‘ay’. Like, ‘cat’ becomes ‘at-cay’.”
Fixed rule, pattern match rule, collections of rules, ...
I posted some comments about ChatGTP in a local FB group and there was a pretty large percent of folks who responded here that think it's just an awful thing that's going to lead to the downfall of civilization. I tried to offer that it is pretty cool, but it's just software that basically presents search engine results in a different manner along with a few other tricks, but it's not "HAL". I live in a very red and…
I'll bite. How does chatgpt fit into any of the conservative themes? I'm baffled. Its not gendered, its not an immigrant, its not "elitist", it generally isn't partisan or for that matter opinionated. Why the hate?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A normie's guide that references subatomic particle mechanics...
I flinched at that too, but the payoff of being able to talk about probability lobes was well worth it. I do think it could handle the electron cloud part better. Definitely lead with the electron shell diagram that most normies have actually seen, the incorrect one with the discrete electrons in rings around the nucleus, and THEN say “after you graduated high school, scientists have built cameras that can actually l…
Depends on age. I’m 35 and we did electron rings in middle school and probability orbitals in high school.
With no good explanation of course. Just expected to memorize. It didn’t make sense to me until college physics
The biggest drawback of LLM is that it never answers with "I don't know" (unless it is some quote) and it just brings bullshit hallucinations which human has to reject as wrong. Thus it is mostly useless for anything serious. Personally I use it to beautify some text, but still have to do a bit of correction to fix b/s or missed context.
I’m not an expert, but I’ve always felt the use of softmax everywhere is a contributing factor. It’s basically saying “you HAVE to pick one” rather than “which one would you pick?”
I posted some comments about ChatGTP in a local FB group and there was a pretty large percent of folks who responded here that think it's just an awful thing that's going to lead to the downfall of civilization. I tried to offer that it is pretty cool, but it's just software that basically presents search engine results in a different manner along with a few other tricks, but it's not "HAL". I live in a very red and…
I'll bite. How does chatgpt fit into any of the conservative themes? I'm baffled. Its not gendered, its not an immigrant, its not "elitist", it generally isn't partisan or for that matter opinionated. Why the hate?
The fact that people think they are rationally debating issues is the problem.
I feel like as an intro aimed at "normies" it still manages to communicate in a more abstract and overthinky way than necessary. People often find it difficult to intuit examples from abstract descriptions. BUT, people are great at intuiting abstractions from concrete examples. You rarely need to explicitly mention abstractions, in informal talk. People's minds are always abstracting. > If I’m relating the collection…
Technically it's a transformation rather than a translation because Pig Latin isn't a real language, it's the product of a word game to make up new words out of English words by rearranging them according to certain rules. The article does assume you know this though (and doesn't consider the alternative of picking a simpler example like cat to CAT in capital letters or cat to chat in French) Same goes for its super…
No, “translate” still works here, regardless of Pig Latin not being a language. And I agree with the GP that it’s more intuitively understandable word than “transform.”