141–150 of 167 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doctors and chemists were paid handsomely by Marlboro Tobacco and Philip Morris. Didn’t make me like the C-suite at those companies any better.
You must not have been one of those doctors or chemists.
So, yes, I have not and will not be one of them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wisdom vs knowledge, where the word "knowledge" is doing a lot of work. LLMs don't "know" anything, they predict the next token that has the aesthetics of a response the prompter wants.
I suspect a lot of people but especially nerdy folks might mix up knowledge and intelligence, because they've been told "you know so much stuff, you are very smart!" And so when they interact with a bot that knows everything, they associate it with smart. Plus we anthropomorphise a lot. Is Wikipedia "smart"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your last sentence suggests that he willingly failed to take the choice to create a vision and a plan. If, for whatever reason, you don't have a vision and a plan, hiring big names to help kickstart that process seems like a way better next step than "do nothing".
How to draw an owl: 1. Hire an artist. 2. Draw the rest of the fucking owl.
4. In frustration, use some AI tool to generate a couple of drafts that are close to what you want and hand them to the artist.
5. Hire a new artist after the first one quits because you don't respect the creative process.
6. Dig deeper into a variety of AI image-generating tools to get really close to what you want, but not quite get there.
7. Hire someone from Fiverr to tweak it in Photoshop because the artists, both bio and non-bio, have burned through your available cash and time.
8. Settle for the least bad of the lot because you have to ship and accept you will never get the image you have in your head.
As someone who's startup got bought out by facebook, many years ago, its not surprising to read. The politics surrounding zuck is wild. Cox left then came back, mainly because hes not actually that good, and has terrible judgement when it comes to features and how to shape effective teams (just throw people at it, features should be purely metric based, or a straight copy of competitors products. There is no cohesive…
Computer scientists spending a career building advertising inventory and private data lakes while at the same time desperate to never be perceived in this light. It must make for an interesting "culture."
The problem with that assessment is that only really the monetisation team were the ones abusing the data. They are an organisation that were very much apart from the rest, different culture and different rules.
For the longest while you could be actually making things better, of thinking you were.
When problems popped up, we _could_ apply pressure and get things fixed. The blatant content discrimination in india, instagram kids, and a load of other changes were forced by employees.
However, in 2023 there were some rule changes aimed at stopping "social justice warrior-ing" internally. It was repeatedly tightened until questioning the leaders is considered against the rules.
Its no coincidence that product decisions are getting worse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The way it sounds, Zuckerberg believes that they can, or at the very least has people around him telling him that they can. But Zuckerberg also though that the Metaverse would be thing. LeCun obviously thinks otherwise and believes that LLMs are a dead-end, and he might be right. The trouble with LLMs is that most people don't really understand how they work. They seem smart, but they are not; they are really just go…
> They seem smart, but they are not; they are really just good at appearing to be smart There are too many different ways to measure intelligence. Speed, matching, discovery, memory, etc. We can combine those levers infinitely create/justify "smart". Are they dumb? Absolutely, but are they smart? Very much so. You can be both at the same time. Maybe you meant genius? Because that standard is quite high and there's no…
This has to be bait
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You've missed the point of the example, of course it's not the exact same thing. With regard to LLM, the biggest difference is that it's a regression against the world's knowledge, like an actor who memorized every question that happens to have an answer written down in history. If you give him a novel question, he'll look at similar questions and just hallucinate a mashup of the answers hoping it makes sense, even t…
I don't think I missed the point; my point is that LLMs do something more complex and far more effective than memorise->regurgitate, and so the original analogy doesn't shed any light. This actor has read billions of plays and learned many of the underlying patterns , which allows him to come up with novel and (often) sensible responses when he is forced to improvise.
They literally do not, what are you talking about?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know we're so defeated as consumers that we can hardly imagine it, but you could just...charge for the customers' access to social media network. Kinda like every other service that charges money. It would have the side effect of making the whole business less ghoulish and manipulative, since the operators wouldn't be incentivized to maximize eyeball hours. It's impossible to imagine this because government regulat…
I hate the ad business model as much as the next person, but this is a pipe dream. Meta had ~$50b in revenue on ads last quarter, and 3.54b “daily active people” whatever that means. That’s in the order of $1/“dap”/week, and there is just absolutely no way any meaningful proportion of their userbase would be paying that much for these apps.
The bigger problem is the monopoly. They would charge $4/mo. Then add ads on top. Then up it to $5/mo. Then..
I feel like many of the comments are focused on the trees and not on the forest. The new head of Facebook AI is 28 years old? That's not OK, that's too young. Too inexperienced and not worldwise enough by a long shot. No shit they're having problems. Can you imagine being a facebook lifer, or one of the LLM pros they've bribed/hired over to the company, to be bossed around by someone with very little life experience?…
That’s much older than when Zuckerberg founded Facebook. Also older than when Bill Gates founded Microsoft, Steve Jobs founded Apple, and Larry Page and Sergey Brin founded Google. We’re talking about running a tech company, not being a politician. Clearly there’s no need to be 50+ and have a bunch of “life experiences” to be successful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you don’t think humans are smart, then what living creature qualifies as smart to you? Or do you think humans created the word but it describes nothing that actually exists in the real world?
I think most things humans do are reflexive, type one "thinking" that AIs do just as well as humans. I think our type two reasoning is roughly comparable to LLM reasoning when it is within the LLM reinforcement learning distribution. I think some humans are smarter than LLMs out-of-distribution, but only when we think carefully, and in many cases LLMs perform better than many humams even in this case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect a lot of people but especially nerdy folks might mix up knowledge and intelligence, because they've been told "you know so much stuff, you are very smart!" And so when they interact with a bot that knows everything, they associate it with smart. Plus we anthropomorphise a lot. Is Wikipedia "smart"?
What is the definition of intelligence?