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

GPU World

gpuworld.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 303 posts

Re: GPU World

#251

Post by onion2k »

Gareth321 wrote: post #247
bwfan123 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It just requires instructions to continue working until the spec is complete Try putting an LLM agent in a deterministic workflow without humans in the loop. My experience with this is not encouraging. Getting it to work requires sprinkling some context magic and hoping and praying the LLM does the right thing. More astrology or religion and less science. Great for use cases with humans-in-the-loop, but less than i…

> Try putting an LLM agent in a deterministic workflow without humans in the loop. I would not use a sewing machine to repair my deck :) LLMs are non -deterministic, by design.

LLMs are non-deterministic, by design.

They don't have to be though. You can give them a temperature of zero so they pick the highest-probability token every time to give you a deterministic output. I imagine this doesn't work on frontier models because there's a lot going on, but you can definitely do it with a small local model.

Re: GPU World

#252

Post by [deleted] »

calmoo wrote: post #228
jedberg wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it isn't. I've put human written material in there (my own unpublished material) and it says 90%+ AI. Then I put some AI material in and it said 30% chance of AI. I only tested it with the two pieces, but was not impressed.

I’ve never actually seen someone give an example of what they say pangram get wrong, so please go ahead and share.

[deleted]

Re: GPU World

#253

Post by mlsu »

camillomiller wrote: post #40
guax wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> not much have changed. So much have changed. The way we shop, travel, navigate a town, the way we socialize, receive information. My formative memory is during the transition from computers are a furniture piece and internet a thing you do to being on your pocket with constant high speed connection and the difference is incredible. I was also part of the people that thought everyone having access would turn out a l…

In the limited pockets of society you experience directly. How much has changed in the relationship between the West and Asia, the economic inequalities globally, or even in the West, etc... if you look at macro, everything moves according to laws that have little to do with the even distribution of technology and a lot to do with the decision makers that get to pick how that distribution takes place.

Huh? What are you talking about?

The relationship between the West and Asia in its current form (Asia as a manufacturing powerhouse, the West as hub of global finance, outsourcing all over the world, JIT manufacturing) all this stuff is totally dependent on instant communication over the internet.

We would not be able to coordinate the world's production activity from Manhattan without the internet. Capital would be far less accumulated and allocated in a way less granular way. Demand signal would be completely different, based way more on brick and mortar. Feedback loops between capital and demand would be constrained to different geographic areas which would make basically all markets way more segregated...

So it changes labor, production, demand, markets, culture, media... I think that's basically everything!

I'll tell you. I would have a different job, my city would have a different population, I would spend my time after work differently, I would shop differently, I would watch different movies and listen to different music.

Re: GPU World

#254

Post by jedberg »

ekelsen wrote: post #61
jedberg wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it isn't. I've put human written material in there (my own unpublished material) and it says 90%+ AI. Then I put some AI material in and it said 30% chance of AI. I only tested it with the two pieces, but was not impressed.

Can you share your human piece that got flagged? And the AI piece that didn't? (Or snippets?) I've found pangram to be very accurate, so I'm curious.

I just posted it above: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49524889

Edit: It was removed. Here is a gist: https://gist.github.com/jedberg/e24124e577c0da1c8445c22798eb...

Re: GPU World

#255

Post by chrismorgan »

hansvm wrote: post #244
zamadatix wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100k prize announcement for a competition right up a HN writer's alley and the top discussion on it is how the announcement page doesn't load correctly on a browser with half the features disabled. We are truly a special group :D.

I have a fully functional, updated Chrome derivative with all the features enabled, and they went out of their way to dynamically load a Update your browser to access this website message as the only visible content rather than test features (which they're clearly doing to GP, so how much work would it be to properly use that feature testing as the main tool for compatability checking) or just letting the browser try…

That message is triggered by checking for support of the CSS light-dark() function and :has() selector:

  window.CSS&&CSS.supports&&CSS.supports('color','light-dark(#000, #fff)')&&CSS.supports('selector(:has(a))')
Are you sure your browser is fully functional and updated? Chromium shipped the last part of that incantation two and a half years ago.

Re: GPU World

#256

Post by chrismorgan »

hansvm wrote: post #246
chrismorgan wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s currently at +39. I did not expect that! I expected it to settle at the bottom like something that settles at the bottom—I dunno, detritus, lees, Titanic, something like that. Still, I’ll take the opportunity to advocate for turning off fonts. Firefox: Settings → Fonts → Advanced settings → Allow pages to choose their own fonts, instead of your selections above . I’ve been using the web so for 6½ years and it ma…

It probably just literally doesn't work for most people. If you click through, see a broken page, and see that the top comment thinks the way in which it's broken is interesting, that'll probably be more interesting to engage with than the contents of the page.

From the code, it looks like it’s only broken if you have a browser more than about two and a half years old, JavaScript disabled, or fonts disabled. Even on HN, I would expect that to be under 5% of viewers, surely under 10%, and people that turn off JS are used to the occasional page not working (though it’s happily less common than it was five years ago).

Re: GPU World

#257

Post by chrismorgan »

sebastos wrote: post #238
chrismorgan wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only reason I commented this was because the specific breakage was novel. And it’s rare for this specific type of comment to rank highly. Apparently this one is unusually interesting to others, or something? Beats me.

Sure, the specifics of this issue are intriguing on their own terms to the website nerds, but “there exists a problem with display of the website” surely rates as a tangential annoyance. It’s unrealistic to imagine that we could ever fully moderate these meta comments away because there’s always going to be new problems and corresponding urges to discuss them. Nor do I think we really want to, when it comes down to i…

Fortunately it’s easy to collapse the tree. And the mods do often override trees like this to default to collapsed.

Re: GPU World

#258

Post by chrismorgan »

alpha_squared wrote: post #232
huangm wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, we’ll fix!

This should be a pretty simple 1-line CSS fix, just default to standard system fonts if the "dg" font isn't available.

No, it’s loading the font in JS for some reason (rather than a regular @font-face) and going out of its way to break the page if that fails, rather than ignoring it as it should. `font-family: dg` is fine, it’ll fall back to the user’s default font (which will typically be serif).

Re: GPU World

#259

Post by pixl97 »

maxnevermind wrote: post #119
embedding-shape wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> LLMs gave us nice productivity tools for highly motivated expert knowledge workers, that is all. I feel like this is incredibly simplistic, and if you changed "LLM" to "computer" or "internet" and went back decades, it's highly likely you'd read the exact same takes in the newspaper back then about those things. It's also at the same time downplaying just how valuable "nice productivity tools for highly motivated e…

> I feel like this is incredibly simplistic, and if you changed "LLM" to "computer" or "internet" and went back decades, it's highly likely you'd read the exact same takes in the newspaper back then about those things. We are not people who write newspapers we are people who are directly involved in application of the technology, we posses a higher level of insight. > I feel like this is incredibly simplistic, and if…

>Computers, the Internet, Steam engine, Rail roads are much more reliable.

Because mostly they are doing a limit number of tasks in a non-generic manner.

Railroads had all kinds of problems at first, from iron rails bending and skewering the riders to engines exploding like high pressure bombs cutting down swaths of people like grain. People still used them with those risks because taking a wagon was worse.

The internet itself is a pretty simple concept. It's "just" packet routing. Now, to make that reliable at scale we've added an enormous amount of complexity to it. If you talk an old TCP stack and dump it on todays internet it you'd find yourself hacked pretty quickly. The internet is a generic packet router, but not a generic anything router.

Computers is where the reliability starts to fall apart. Once you go from specialized purpose to general purpose the size of the problem space explodes. You wouldn't get companies called things like Micro$lop (and these things were from before the AI days).

Then when you get to AI/LLMs and especially when you push into AGI you're creating a do anything now machine. And when you can do anything it takes a lot of training to eliminate the choices that end badly. You are the endpoint of 500 million years of training, for example.

>Can you do that with LLMs? It doesn't look that way.

Can anyone do it now? You're talking about low hanging fruit 200 years ago, but how much of that is left? How much harder are we going to have to fight for the next apple up?

Re: GPU World

#260

Post by akoumjian »

This is a great contest.

> never becomes superhuman

Arguably, we are already there. I think the idea of the intelligence not scaling far beyond what we have now is worth considering, though doubtful.

Post reply on HN