261–265 of 265 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are mixing up levels. When you are asking it a question (like which of these two texts is the best), the output is also just picked by minimising that loss function. There's no guarantee that answering "Text B is better" aligns with text B minimising the loss function. (And they aren't really minimising loss functions during inference. They sample from a distribution. During training they minimise the loss functi…
Point taken, I was possibly overly curt in my response, leading to it being ambiguous, both re when the loss function is being minimised and that it is a stochastic process. So to OPs question: I guess LLMs do have an "idea" of what is best (conditioned on minimising a loss function during training), however they may not always output that (because stochasticity), which maybe represents a degree of uncertainty in tha…
But depending on their training data, these tokens might say 'correct horse battery staple', and not necessarily 'text A is better' or 'text B is better'.
Even if text A would have been more likely to be produced by the LLM.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That's election blathering Your degree if denialism is really impressive. You dismiss, the mass killings, the push to erase a nation, and you even dismiss representatives outright admitting and acknowledging doing it. Where exactly do you place the bar that would lead you to say "Yes, Israel is committing genocide".
> Where exactly do you place the bar… At the very least you’d expect the population being genocided to decline. Palestinian population growth has been exponential throughout Israel’s history (if you’re one of those who claim the “genocide” started a long time ago), and even the population of Gaza has not declined after 3 years of war (reported births are still more than reported deaths).
Imagine being a European in 1940 and claiming there’s no genocide against the Jews because "at the very least you’d expect the population being genocided to decline" (at that point "only" around 100,000 had been killed).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Where exactly do you place the bar… At the very least you’d expect the population being genocided to decline. Palestinian population growth has been exponential throughout Israel’s history (if you’re one of those who claim the “genocide” started a long time ago), and even the population of Gaza has not declined after 3 years of war (reported births are still more than reported deaths).
> At the very least you’d expect the population being genocided to decline. Imagine being a European in 1940 and claiming there’s no genocide against the Jews because "at the very least you’d expect the population being genocided to decline" (at that point "only" around 100,000 had been killed).
The total killed in Gaza in 2026 is about 920 (mostly targeted attacks of individuals who participated in the Oct 7 massacre).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> At the very least you’d expect the population being genocided to decline. Imagine being a European in 1940 and claiming there’s no genocide against the Jews because "at the very least you’d expect the population being genocided to decline" (at that point "only" around 100,000 had been killed).
We’re not in 2023. By 1942, when the Red Cross refused to say there’s a genocide, 4.5 million Jews had been killed - 3 million in 1942 alone. The total killed in Gaza in 2026 is about 920 (mostly targeted attacks of individuals who participated in the Oct 7 massacre).