431–440 of 559 posts
This is the opposite of a book burning. These books which only a few would ever know the names of, let alone find, let alone read, are being digitised so they can be found in electronic searches.
They are creating embedding vectors and training documents - changing whatever they want - and destroying the original copy so nobody knows what was actually said.
It is just like book burning.
This is the opposite of a book burning. These books which only a few would ever know the names of, let alone find, let alone read, are being digitised so they can be found in electronic searches.
And knowledge from these books can be "imprinted" into a model to be used by much more people or even survive this planet once sent into space in a probe.
I would say “reduced”
It seems a key contention of theirs is the possibility that rare books are being destroyed this way, yet the things they cite don't seem to suggest this (based on their paraphrasing), they just throw the following at the end to make it seem like it's occurring to irreplaceable books: > You can't replace the last three copies of an 18th-century botanical text once someone shreds them for training data. And the judge s…
There is zero reason to shred 18th century books. Any such books are out of copyright.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> they're using the info to regurgitate in some fashion and serve back. Sure, in the same sense that they regurgitate any other text they consume. LLMs by definition do not have the full training dataset available, though. It’s far larger than the resulting model. So they can’t reliably reproduce full text without an external source (or if it’s in the training data repeatedly). ChatGPT actually refused to give me a b…
> It’s far larger than the resulting model. Is it? How many different books are we talking about, and how much information is that, after conversion to text and lossless compression? Images, maybe, but text?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It’s far larger than the resulting model. Is it? How many different books are we talking about, and how much information is that, after conversion to text and lossless compression? Images, maybe, but text?
These models are trained on way more than just books. GPT-3 was trained on about half a terabyte of filtered plaintext and the training corpuses have grown significantly by then by all accounts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Vinge also coined the term "the Singularity" ( https://accelerating.org/articles/comingtechsingularity ) what he describes as "an opaque wall across the future" once superhuman artificial intelligence comes on the scene.
he didn't? stan ulam credits 'singularity' to von neumann vinge wrote his singularity piece in the 80s I believe
> Stan Ulam [28] paraphrased John von Neumann as saying:
>> One conversation centered on the ever accelerating progress of technology and changes in the mode of human life, which gives the appearance of approaching some essential singularity in the history of the race beyond which human affairs, as we know them, could not continue.
> Von Neumann even uses the term singularity, though it appears he is thinking of normal progress, not the creation of superhuman intellect. (For me, the superhumanity is the essence of the Singularity. Without that we would get a glut of technical riches, never properly absorbed (see [25]).)
which hews much closer to how people who are fans of the term use it (the Singularity explicitly refers to the rise of superhumanly intelligent systems, not just the progress of technology overall).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I did that I'd seal them with silica gel to keep the humidity down.
I would think this totally dries the pages out and then they just turn to dust, from experience.
Archivists recommend standard ambient conditions or a little drier for long term storage. As you've said, too dry and the pages fall apart; permanent damage.
I suppose the fancy silica gels that maintain specific humidities would work in bags.