241–250 of 268 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do Western models censor?
I’m guessing they’re referring to things like refusals if it thinks your request may be related to building a bioweapon, or hack someone else, etc.
By censorship I mean things like "nothing happens in 1989". By public safety I mean "no I won't tell you how to build a bioweapon for genocide".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about censorship? > I will be able to use them forever Where will you run them when powerful enough GPU and RAM are only sold to hyperscalers?
Everyone censors for their core jurisdiction/audience. The Enlightened West just calls this guardrails
idk about you but i WANT the second thing, because I like to be alive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot like humans, really. People regularly cite something they read, or quote a stat that turns out to be just completely inaccurate. But if you look up the thing, then you have facts again.
Sure, and by the same logic, if I was trying to cook a steak, I would not trust an arbitrary human to know the correct temperature off the top of their head; I'd want someone who I could trust had actual experience with the task I was trying to perform. The difference is that most humans are fully able to recognize whether they've cooked steak often enough to know the correct temperature off the top of their head, an…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you making a serious argument that superhuman intelligence is a plausible outcome of training LLMs on everything humanity knows so far? Are you making a serious argument that it's not? Because you'll need to explain leading-edge mathematics advances that have come from LLMs, among other things.
Superhuman intelligence? Really? These leading-edge advances indicate intelligence beyond the level of humanity?
Also, you may have noticed in passing that humans aren't getting any smarter, while AI models are.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We will all be winners.
Maybe - we'll have to wait and see. By my reckoning, there's a significant chance most software engineers will be unemployable within a few years. But I'm not 100% confident that there'll be a utopia waiting for us, as an alternative.
So my new pet theory is that this is one of the few times we're seeing a positive effect from the heads of all of these big businesses being part of weird public (e.g. WEF) and private (e.g. Bohemian Club) orgs where they get to together and conspire to conquer the world or whatever. Rapid replacement of labor would be horrifically self defeating, because you'd end up not only tanking your own economy but having a bunch of angry and increasingly desperate people with a whole lot of time on their hands. That doesn't tend to end well for the powers that be.
So I think there's going to be a conscious effort to transition between this era, and whatever comes next, in a more controlled way than $$$ YOLO $$$.
The real revolution is Deepseek v4 flash and similar models (GPT 5.6 Luna, muse spark 1.2, mimo, etc...) - Genuinely good performance for a tiny fraction of the cost of Fable and even GLM etc... I think a lot of people would be very content if they never got smarter, and just kept getting even cheaper/faster. Of course, both things continue to happen on a seemingly monthly basis
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do Western models censor?
I’m guessing they’re referring to things like refusals if it thinks your request may be related to building a bioweapon, or hack someone else, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As long as these models constantly keep switching up things like the temperatures at which a steak will be medium rare or at which temperature to season cast iron, you will never be able to trust them for cooking. My mother ruined a nice waterfowl for Christmas by listening to Gemini. And this is inherent to how LLMs work.
Not if you let your LLM grounds its truth in established facts. Otherwise they would be useless for programming for example.
Take that away and you'll barely be able to make an app that display a pigeon riding a bicycle (or whatever you ppl are doing these days).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
US models censor and restrict more things than Chinese models by quite a margin.
So you choose bad over worse and pretend it's good
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Evidence actually supports that capabilities are leveling off, and cheaper/faster is not really coming. Just log-linearly more capability at smaller parameter counts as they saturate.
Please explain why you think cheaper/faster is not coming? All current devices used to run AI are very far from an efficient solution to the problem. What you really want is a pure dataflow architecture, instead of a von Neumann machine. The reason people aren't really making them yet is that when you build one, even if you use SRAM for the weights, you are binding yourself to the dimensions of the model you target -…
It's highly likely that over the next 10 years we find demand and loss of production further constrains supply.
Designing a specific model into silicon sounds like one of the worst possible ideas. No better way to freeze assumptions and limit growth. Software defined solutions dominate for a reason, because adaptability is key.
Models were never the answer. Eventually we'll get past the nonsense of observationally inefficient neural nets.