Not sure why you’re being down voted, it’s a fair point.

https://erinkissane.com/meta-in-myanmar-full-series

That’s not really true though… They come up with brand new sentences all the time.

Those are some wild lines of reasoning, on both sides.

Why is this so funny? It’s fucking stupid 😂

Thank you!

Yeah, maybe you’re right. I don’t known where the threshold is.

I wonder if the current computational feasibility will cap out improvment of current generation LLMs soon?

emergent behavior doesn’t really exist in certain model archetypes

Hey, would you have a reference for this? I’d love to read it. Does it apply to deep neural nets? And/or recurrent NNs?

This is a fun read

Hicks, M.T., Humphries, J. & Slater, J. ChatGPT is bullshit. Ethics Inf Technol 26, 38 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5

Doesn’t that just say that AI will never be cheap? You can still brute force it, which is more or less how back propagation works.

I don’t think “intelligence” needs to have a perfect “solution”, it just needs to do things well enough to be useful. Which is how human intelligence developed, evolutionarily - it’s absolutely not optimal.

Yes! If you want to take the next step, you could consider murdering a fossil fuel corporation CEO!

Did we though

It’s at the other end though

To be fair, a) they are not the administration yet, and b) no one in any previous administration was secretly working for the US either.

Wat

And includes all the nutrients a growing body needs!

It’s easier to clean than carpet

Edit: I can only assume that one down vote is from the Big Carpet Cleaning lobby

Sure, but that’s just Sturgeon’s Law.

Isn’t that what peertube is for?

I can see how this might be true if an AI can respond to individual cues from a single kid, which a teacher can’t reliably do because they have to look after 30 kids at once.

I’m skeptical that those cue responses will be reasonable though. Maybe in the mean, but I reckon there’s gonna be some wild and potentially traumatic edge cases.