People being economically displaced from innovation increasing productivity is good provided it happens at a reasonable place and there is a sufficient social saftey net to get those people back on their feet. Unfortunately those saftey nets dont exist everywhere and have been under attack (in the west) for the past 40 years.
I don’t think that’s really a fair comparison, babies exist with images and sounds for over a year before they begin to learn language, so it would make sense that they begin to understand the world in non-linguistic terms and then apply language to that. LLMs only exist in relation to language so couldnt understand a concept separately to language, it would be like asking a person to conceptualise radio waves prior to having heard about them.
Probably, given that LLMs only exist in the domain of language, still interesting that they seem to have a “conceptual” systems that is commonly shared between languages.
Compared to a human who forms an abstract thought and then translates that thought into words. Which words I use has little to do with which other words I’ve used except to make sure I’m following the rules of grammar.
Interesting that…
Anthropic also found, among other things, that Claude “sometimes thinks in a conceptual space that is shared between languages, suggesting it has a kind of universal ‘language of thought’.”
Translations apps would be the main one for LLM tech, LLMs largely came out of google’s research into machine translation.
No you’re not going crazy, you just understand economics and trade more than the President of the USA.
I wouldnt trust the words of a Palantir exec if they said the sky was blue, but even accepting what they say, its just that the hamas attacks gave the ban impetus to move forwards. By his own words the ban already had bipartesan support and executive approval before that.
The headline that it was “about” Isreal rather than China is a massive reach.
Its a very difficult subject, both sides have merit. I can see the “CSAM created without abuse could be used in treatment/management of people with these horrible urges” but I can also see “Allowing people to create CSAM could normalise it and lead to more actual abuse”.
Sadly its incredibly difficult for academics to study this subject and see which of those two is more prevalent.
Similar but not quite as bad, Watson and Crick who did the analysis that figured out the structure got the Nobel, but Rosalind Franklin who did the xray diffraction that got them the data that allowed them to figure out the double helix structure got left out.
Still pretty bad, but not as bad as giving the prize to someone who did no work for it and actively argued against Bell’s conclusions.
Obviously its important, but pretending its not political doesnt make any sense. If a community doesnt want to discuss politics (and as far as I’ve seen the OP didnt say which community this was in) then its a reasonable post to remove.
It does not, unless you run weights that someone else has modified to remove the baked in censorship. If you run the unmodified weights released by deepseek it will refuse to answer most things that the CCP dont like being discussed.
Of course its political, what else would it be? You are talking about peoples rights (a political concept) being breached by an administration (poltical) using an arm of the government (political) as a paramilitary force (political).
Perhaps, I think its more likely that active moderation is the cause of that rather than word lists that let p!ss, pi$s and pιss through when trying to block piss.
Yeah the article seems to be “Nuclear and fossil fuels are reliable and list that as an advantage, geothermal is also reliable and lists that as an advantage”, to which: yeah? That is the case. The problem with fossil fuels is that they are an exceptionally good energy source, apart from the fact that they are slowly choking the planet. If they werent so good at providing energy they would be a lot easier to replace.
The Scunthorpe problem is hard, and any simple blacklist method is bound to give both false positives and false negatives.
it actually is an enlightening comparison when you dig into it. It’s saying that the energy required to power one play of a song is 4e4*365/5e9 of the energy to heat a home for one day. That comes out to about 0.3%, i.e. if you watch a three minute youtube video three times and do absolutely nothing else that day but heat your house (dont use any other electricity, dont eat anything, dont travel anywhere) you increase your energy usage by a total of 1%
The point is that google is no longer just listing search results. For years now it has been giving the “correct” answer as well as results. This started of with things it could recognise and easily solve like calculations (“what is 432 times 548”), but has now moved into general queries powered by LLMs that have no knowledge of fact.
We also didnt understand how the internet would change the world, still went ahead with it. We didnt understand how computers would change the world, still went ahead with it, we didnt understand how the steam engine would change the world… etc etc.
No one can know how a new invention will change things, but you are not going to be able to crush human’s innate creativity and drive to try new things. Sometimes those things are going to be a net negative and that’s bad, but the alternative is to insist nothing new is tried and thats A bad and B not possible.