91–100 of 109 posts
I find it helps a LOT with discovery. Llm spends a lot less time figuring out where things are. It’s essentially “cached discovery”
I don't see why this wouldn't just lead to model collapse: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07566-y If you've spent any time using LLMs to write documentation you'll see this for yourself: the compounding will just be rewriting valid information with less terse information. I find it concerning Karpathy doesn't see this. But I'm not surprised, because AI maximalists seem to find it really difficult to be...…
The article is not on training LLMs. it is about using LLMs to write a wiki for personal use. The article assumes a fully trained LLM such as ChatGPT or Claude already exists to be used.
Everything is derived from them and backlinks into them. Which is necessary to be vigilant about staleness, correctness, drift, and more. Just like in a human-built knowledge base.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use a home baked system based on obsidian that is essentially just “obsidian but with structured format on top with schemas” and I deploy this in multiple places with ranges of end users. It is more valuable than you think. The intermediary layer is great for capturing intent of design and determining when implementation diverges from that. There will always be a divergence from the intent of a system and how it ac…
Interesting, I'd love to know more. Are parts of it public?
[0] “Stuffing Context is not Memory, Updating Weights Is": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jty4s9-Jb78
I’m surprised Karpathy thinks this is a viable solution for a quasi-continual learning system. Yes, it’s cool to experiment with these sort of ‘intermediate knowledge systems’, but the real goal within this current LLM paradigm remains clear: new information within a knowledge system should be manifest through updating the weights ! Many efforts are taking a crack at this, which this really helpful talk [0] by Jack M…
I have no doubt that using LLMs as a notebook, which many of us have been doing now (and the best end-user application of which is Google’s NotebookLM), are a viable path forward for knowledge management. I find myself going back to certain LLM conversations as a ‘running log’ of a given project (akin to notebook-style thinking/building).
But what about merging concepts from the version control world (Git/SVN), rather than the wiki world? Karpathy should do more explanation about what took him down the wiki route vs that, in these early days of using LLMs as notebooks.
I don't see why this wouldn't just lead to model collapse: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07566-y If you've spent any time using LLMs to write documentation you'll see this for yourself: the compounding will just be rewriting valid information with less terse information. I find it concerning Karpathy doesn't see this. But I'm not surprised, because AI maximalists seem to find it really difficult to be...…
Edit for context: the sibling comment from karpathy is gone after being flagged to oblivion. Not sure if he deleted it or if it was just removed based on the number of flags? He had copy-pasted a few snarky responses from Claude and essentially said “Claude has this to say to you:” followed by a super long run on paragraph of slop. ———— Wow, I respect karpathy so much and have learned a ton from him. But WTF is the s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Edit for context: the sibling comment from karpathy is gone after being flagged to oblivion. Not sure if he deleted it or if it was just removed based on the number of flags? He had copy-pasted a few snarky responses from Claude and essentially said “Claude has this to say to you:” followed by a super long run on paragraph of slop. ———— Wow, I respect karpathy so much and have learned a ton from him. But WTF is the s…
It's not sad. He's a person like you and me. devnullbrain's comment is snarky. He invoked model collapse which has nothing to do with the topic of a wiki/kb, he wrote that karpathy is not normal, and then seemed to imply that the idea was useless. I'd be pretty in my feels and the fact that he wrote it and deleted it seems like a +1 normal guy thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not sad. He's a person like you and me. devnullbrain's comment is snarky. He invoked model collapse which has nothing to do with the topic of a wiki/kb, he wrote that karpathy is not normal, and then seemed to imply that the idea was useless. I'd be pretty in my feels and the fact that he wrote it and deleted it seems like a +1 normal guy thing.
Yeah. I know you didn’t see it, but it was truly a substance-free response. Glad to see he deleted it and I know I’ve been guilty of the same kind of knee-jerk response before.