Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A simulation of me: fine-tuning an LLM on 240k text messages

edwarddonner.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 145 posts

Re: A simulation of me: fine-tuning an LLM on 240k text messages

#131

Post by qup »

noduerme wrote: post #106
kawzeg wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the point the poster you're responding to was making is this: If people lose their money quickly to bots/collusion/cheating (or simply skilled players), they will quickly run out of money. If they play each other, they can play more hands, so more profit for the casino. To exemplify the two extremes, assuming 10% rake: Player A has $10, and loses $1 every hand: after 10 hands, he's broke and $1 went to the ca…

Well that is how it works. The casino provides the service of collecting players together to form a game, serving a fair platform for them to play on, ingesting and disbursing funds (which is no small matter), and then attempting to prevent them from cheating each other. That is the business model for poker, and it's extremely hard to make it profitable. If you factor in the time it takes to do all those things, as w…

3% rake is amazing. Where's that?

Re: A simulation of me: fine-tuning an LLM on 240k text messages

#132

Post by valine »

krainboltgreene wrote: post #119
valine wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I read your comment I trained my own mental model on your words. How is that any different? When a human reads words they apply a sophisticated theory of mind to contextualize the writing and the mental state of the author. If anything, LLM fine tuning is far less invasive than having a person read your writing.

This is an unserious argument and no one is swayed by it.

The idea that reading a piece of text constitutes copyright infringement is ridiculous. Copyright isn’t some infectious thing. Reading copyrighted text doesn’t give the copyright holder a claim to the future creative work of the reader.

You want to restrict model training, I get it. The debate is still ongoing, but I’m confident when these “copyright” claims work their way through court the AI companies will come out on top.

Re: A simulation of me: fine-tuning an LLM on 240k text messages

#133

Post by oreegumee »

ben_w wrote: post #109
oreegumee wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What we get out of these gadgets is addiction to peering into them for answers and filling an existential hole like astrology. Meanwhile tomorrow will go by just the same as yesterday. Technology isn’t altering physics, it’s operates within the boundaries set by experiment a century ago. It’s not curtailing human social problems that have existed since forever. Trade offs in society just like engineering; arguments i…

> Technology isn’t altering physics, it’s operates within the boundaries set by experiment a century ago. Technology is doing things that many people a century ago thought was impossible, in some cases practically, and in other cases even theoretically. For example, that the chips inside your phone have features significantly smaller than the wavelengths of light used to etch them, which are also in the size range wh…

Yeah I have a BSc in math, MSc in physics. Am familiar with the variety of technologies that exist due to understanding those topics.

It must feel very empowering to construct those sentences. Lindy effect is ticking on all of it and humanity. Despite those accomplishments, we’re not going to break physics; humanity will cease to exist.

We’ve burned up a lot of our own runway via resource consumption on consumer shovelgear/wear. Put the toxic positivity spin on it all you want, there is no moat when we use up Earth diddling our good feels, changing nothing but the speed at which we exhaust ourselves.

Fingers crossed the decline in obligation to preserve religious memes breaks us free from social stagnation and normalization (though the olds are trying to perpetuate through economic memes) and allow us to live organically, devalue things we get bored with, as our brains seem to do organically:

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/mom-voice-kid-brain-teen...

Trends in such a direction:

https://www.deseret.com/23583331/teens-smartphones

https://www.washingtonpost.com/parenting/2023/02/21/teens-no...

Industrial controls that stabilize logistics are one kind of technology. Online thought policing via social media and the gadgets that provide it are huge wastes. Titillating to the olds, but banal and normalized to the kids.

Re: A simulation of me: fine-tuning an LLM on 240k text messages

#134

Post by layman51 »

skybrian wrote: post #127
fouc wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I looked it up. Ubik was written earlier in 1969, than Neuromancer, which was written in 1984

Haven't read Ubik. I'm under the impression it essentially happens by magic (fantasy)? Or is some fictional technology involved?

It is a kind of cryogenic technology where the person is “half-alive”. But still I guess the book itself does have magical elements in it such as psychic powers.

Re: A simulation of me: fine-tuning an LLM on 240k text messages

#135

Post by oreegumee »

ben_w wrote: post #109
oreegumee wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What we get out of these gadgets is addiction to peering into them for answers and filling an existential hole like astrology. Meanwhile tomorrow will go by just the same as yesterday. Technology isn’t altering physics, it’s operates within the boundaries set by experiment a century ago. It’s not curtailing human social problems that have existed since forever. Trade offs in society just like engineering; arguments i…

> Technology isn’t altering physics, it’s operates within the boundaries set by experiment a century ago. Technology is doing things that many people a century ago thought was impossible, in some cases practically, and in other cases even theoretically. For example, that the chips inside your phone have features significantly smaller than the wavelengths of light used to etch them, which are also in the size range wh…

[dead]

Re: A simulation of me: fine-tuning an LLM on 240k text messages

#136

Post by LightBug1 »

dontupvoteme wrote: post #56
vunderba wrote: post #23

I’m far from the first to think of this. Several people — perhaps inspired by creepy Black Mirror episodes — have tried to fine-tune an LLM on their SMS or WhatsApp history in an effort to create a simulation of themselves. It's a much older concept than Black Mirror. Ever since Markov chain IRC bots got popularized in the late 90s and early 2000s, people have been trying to train their virtual doppelgängers. I'm sur…

As a coarse bare minimum this is from Neuromancer. I am not sure if Gibson found inspiration elsewear but this is pure flatline dixie. Fundamentally I suppose it's naught but whispers from the beyond.

“Well, it feels like I am, kid, but I’m really just a bunch of ROM. It’s one of them, ah, philosophical questions, I guess...” The ugly laughter sensation rattled down Case’s spine. “But I ain’t likely to write you no poem, if you follow me. Your AI, it just might. But it ain’t no way human.”

Re: A simulation of me: fine-tuning an LLM on 240k text messages

#137

Post by noduerme »

lagniappe wrote: post #118
noduerme wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do, and I don't mind showing you them if you're interested, but why do you care? ah fuckit. SO yeah, I lived outside the US and ran a bitcoin casino for some years for non-US players, which was blocked to US IP ranges and required IDs to eliminate US customers (even though Bitcoin gambling still wasn't officially illegal at the time). My general idea was to make a casino for smart people who liked puzzles, so to th…

Doug?

I am not named Doug. There was a player named Doug, if I recall correctly, who with his wife became the focus of a collusion investigation which he denied, turning into a major war where he was ultimately banned... don't know if that's what you're referring to, but that's what jumped to my mind.

Re: A simulation of me: fine-tuning an LLM on 240k text messages

#138

Post by lagniappe »

noduerme wrote: post #137
lagniappe wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doug?

I am not named Doug. There was a player named Doug, if I recall correctly, who with his wife became the focus of a collusion investigation which he denied, turning into a major war where he was ultimately banned... don't know if that's what you're referring to, but that's what jumped to my mind.

Small world :)

Re: A simulation of me: fine-tuning an LLM on 240k text messages

#139

Post by krainboltgreene »

valine wrote: post #132
krainboltgreene wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an unserious argument and no one is swayed by it.

The idea that reading a piece of text constitutes copyright infringement is ridiculous. Copyright isn’t some infectious thing. Reading copyrighted text doesn’t give the copyright holder a claim to the future creative work of the reader. You want to restrict model training, I get it. The debate is still ongoing, but I’m confident when these “copyright” claims work their way through court the AI companies will come out…

> The idea that reading a piece of text constitutes copyright infringement is ridiculous.

No man, it's not ridiculous. If I write a program that copies someone's book and try to sell it I'm infringing on that copyright. I cannot sell a zipped version of the Harry Potter books. I feel like there's so many people weighing in on this discussion who haven't actually done any real world copyright related stuff.

Re: A simulation of me: fine-tuning an LLM on 240k text messages

#140

Post by valine »

krainboltgreene wrote: post #139
valine wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that reading a piece of text constitutes copyright infringement is ridiculous. Copyright isn’t some infectious thing. Reading copyrighted text doesn’t give the copyright holder a claim to the future creative work of the reader. You want to restrict model training, I get it. The debate is still ongoing, but I’m confident when these “copyright” claims work their way through court the AI companies will come out…

> The idea that reading a piece of text constitutes copyright infringement is ridiculous. No man, it's not ridiculous. If I write a program that copies someone's book and try to sell it I'm infringing on that copyright. I cannot sell a zipped version of the Harry Potter books. I feel like there's so many people weighing in on this discussion who haven't actually done any real world copyright related stuff.

I see the source of your confusion. LLMs are not actually zips of the training dataset.
Post reply on HN