@AnarchoNinaWrites how about we put an upper limit on the size of an ethnostate, say 4 acres max. ideally on an island so the ethnostate can fully isolate itself from the rest of the world's population successfully?
*habsburg jaw intensifies*
shouldn't take too many generations for that family-wreath to close
And now, one of many possible payoffs from this walkthrough of fundamentals in mentation and communication:
YOU CANNOT ASSUME AN LLM IS GENERALLY INTELLIGENT MERELY BECAUSE IT SPEAKS WELL.
You also can't assume a *human* is unusually intelligent simply because they speak unusually well--you're evaluating their language facility, NOT their general intelligence.
Thank you for coming to my frustrated TedXYZ talk, I'll be here all eternity.
The Badger Badger Badger video is in the British Film Institute's archive of significant British films. 😳 https://replay.bfi.org.uk/video/fe55f1ff-bd71-5f02-8f89-6d6829c75d0d
what does power, mass storage, HID devices, displays and other peripherals have in common?
laptop vendors be like
we're going to consolidate all connectivity ports into 1 or 2 easy to break usb-c ports and you must power this device with a 2m max power cable.
every once in a while someone asks us "why can't you just review the slop code as if it were human written" and let me tell you that we have tried it, and you cannot, actually, do this, for the simple reasons that humans do not write code like that
human-written code follows a progression and exhibits a model of the problem domain. the model may be wrong, the progression may be wrong, but line 1 and line 10 are related to each other.
LLM code has none of that. it looks like code, but does not have the structure of it. there is no progression of thought, there is no model of the problem domain, and lines 1 and lines 10 bear no relationship to each other outside of statistical likelihood.
the question thus asks, "why can't you just eat the dogshit as if it were a burger cooked by a human"
@35millimetre you have 3 lobes?
<insert Ferengi joke here about lobes leading to skills in acquisition>
Steve:
frequent overthinker, compulsive fixer, digester-then-explainer, "why?" question relishing father, minor-irritant partner, excessive disassembler, original-form hacker, high-efficiency googler, borderline-competent car-fixer, expert-level car-breaker, faster-by-qwerty communicator, indiscriminate photo-taker, Leatherman owner.