Dr Cog

Not in any way, no. Our brains can’t predict what we will be interested in or good at.

But we do have predispositions. If you are able to focus intently on things, or are creative, or are more athletic, which are reflected in neuronal connectivity, you might be more interested in more detail-oriented or creative or athletic hobbies.

I wish I was a better piano player

I’m a competent musician in many instruments but I could never get the hang of using my left hand for accompaniment

From someone with a science background: There are a lot of expenses with that type of clinical trial.

In particular, if you’re going to assign someone to a group that is known to be unhealthy (brushing once a month) you need to pay for any dental or medical problems that arise from them not brushing.

It would be a problem if he was brought on to talk about COVID being a hoax. It’s not really a problem if he’s talking about something entirely different and not problematic

Sounds like a disingenuous argument.

If you’re a content creator and you can leave, you should. If you can’t, well obviously you shouldn’t yet.

I think the problem is that a lot of shows become overhyped once they reach a certain level of popularity. While you may have enjoyed it if you came across it naturally, the hype you’ve encountered around it makes you expect more. Avatar and Parks and Rec are great shows, but they’re definitely not the best shows of all time (although I do really love Parks and Rec) and you’d probably expect them to be these amazing shows if all you know about them is the hype from superfans.

Two cuties*

Always get cats in pairs. They tire themselves out instead of constantly needing attention from you

Always good to recognize that while there are many things most people should realize by the time they are adults, there are also about 10,000 people becoming adults every day.

It won’t replace entire ground crews, because the machines will break down. You’ll need someone to service them, and a small team to act in case there are no backups.

Just think of all the horse trainers that will be displaced by the invention of cars! Those cars won’t be paying taxes, that’s for sure.

Aldi has the best store-brand snacks

Their chips, though, are legitimately better than any other brand I’ve had including name brand

Sync has a monthly fee to get rid of ads, Eternity is always ad-free

Ok, but AI isn’t going away. So if these companies stop serving open access, the ONLY people that will use them will be the people who can afford the server/processing time.

This article isn’t about usefulness of the models to normal people. It’s about profitability of the models to the corporations that serve them.

Paying close attention is ironically very important if you’re interested in foraging

No need to try again. They already are implementing additional costs. 2 steps forward, 1 step back.

You may underestimate the amount of money the Saudi government has

Sounds horrible. Quality of life must be terrible there!

The work is not reproduced in its entirety. Simply using the work in its entirety is not a violation of copyright law, just as reading a book or watching a movie (even if pirated) is not a violation. The reproduction of that work is the violation, and LLMs simply do not store the works in their entirety nor are they capable of reproducing them.

The argument is less that an LLM is a human and more that it is not a copyright violation to use a material to train the LLM. By current legal definitions, it is fair use unless the material is able to be reproduced in its entirety (or at least, in some meaningful way).

It’s only black box because nobody has the time (likely years to decades) to wade through the layers of a finished model to check every node and weight.

This is exactly correct, except you’re also not accounting for the insane amount of computational power that would be necessary to backtrack a single output of a single model. This is why it is a black box. It simply is not possible on a meaningful level.

So if math and computer science isn’t an exact science, what is?

Things that are reproducible with known inputs and outputs, allowing for all components to be studied and explained. As an example from my field: if you damage the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in a fully grown adult, they will have the impulse control of a three-year old. We know this because we have observed damage to this area in multiple individuals, and can measure the effects based on the severity of that damage.

In contrast, if you provide the same billion-parameter neural network identical inputs, you will not receive identical outputs.