beng-nl

Forward deployed engineers too

Not op, but I do sometimes indulge in such anthropomorphic conversation. Confiding in it that a certain (bad) result in the research project we’re working on ‘feels bad’ and reading its supportive reply makes me feel less alone in failure.

In another instance, ChatGPT didn’t think a particular test would prove to be statistically significant, so I ‘bet’ with it it would (after collecting an agreed on number of samples) and the loser would write a poem for the other. I won and it did. It gave me joy. It doesn’t replace a human as collaborator, but it can still be joyful.

I realize all this might read a bit childish or indulgent or delusional to some. But as long as it doesn’t replace human contact, I think it’s (cautiously) net positive.

I’m curious what other people here think of this, or what their own experiences are.

I agree: it feels to me that judging this implies knowing whether there is a solution at all (or a solution available per model, example: whether either model will answer it given known guardrails), which is as powerful as answering the question in the first place (the router can answer the decision problem, which can polynomially be transformed into getting a specific solution).

It reminds me of someone I met at a poster session who had an incredible project: his ai could include a confidence score with its answer, and he had evidence that x% confident answers were in fact correct x% of the time. That also gave me the gut feeling of that being impossible (in the general case) as it implies more powerful capability than the ai answering the question, in an oracle like way.

Patiënt zero, that’s what :-)

Say what you want about Frank abagnale.. but damn can he tell a compelling story.

Common in NL too; I know a company that specializes in installing these on apartment buildings and sharing the benefits per apartment. Although they’ve started favoring larger installation projects I heard.

Supposedly yes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crab_mentality

The scourge of nouning.

I see how jarring it is for you, but I want to comment-vouch against your flag. If you slow down a little, you can spot some meaning there. Its oddly phrased, but it does make sense that vectors (as in: simd vectors) are the building blocks of execution (to put it closer to how I might say it).

I’ve had similar ideas in the past: clearly simd is the way to get the most out of your cpu. Can we design a language where all operations are automatically simd, and it takes effort to do anything in scalars?

And I guess these array languages are what you might get.

It’s not ‘unit vector of thought,’ btw, which is weirder than what it says.

Not if the thing is actually worth $3000

You are motivating me to get enough reputation points to be allowed to downvote.

I also think the friction is a higher obstacle than the cost.

Wow, that is honestly a bit freaky - first I’ve heard of anything like that. I will assume it was a client side action, but still horribly invasive if that’s how it went. I’ll try to find more about this possibility.

Can you be sure WhatsApp retroactively censored a message? Implying someone else but the direct recipient could read and delete/change it? (I believe group chats are different, forgot the details.) I don’t want to be dismissive but.. well i dont believe this is the best explanation given just these observations.

Phegasus

And we’re not sure about the cosmos.

The water isn’t destroyed, though, is it? It evaporates, right? So it isn’t lost?

I don’t get what you’re implying. What is repatriating; You think they will move their workloads to on-prem?

Is there something different about the world that changed the trade-off calculus for cloud vs on-prem from how it was in the last 15 years compared to now?

(I’m as anti-cloud-overspend as the next guy on hn btw. Just trying to make sense of your comment’s worldview.)

Ouch, did not expect to get triggered by this on HN

- Peugeot 2008 owner but not much longer

As a thought experiment - such shocks (govt pressure to use models for bad purposes and govt excluding access to non-Americans) coming early in the ‘ai revolution’ will wake up the rest of the world sooner that they have to get their act together to stay competitive without relying on USA. Just like with nato.

It’s not ai penned, it’s human authored.

What happens when you teach him to fish :-(

I loved that show. The love that went into it really shows.

Sadly the gap between reality and satire has shrunk.

But yes. I also wish that show would come back.

Noam shazeer would be google head dreamer

Can you write a more specific question? I think the meaning of the comment is clear enough, but maybe you’re asking for more specifics? Ironically I can not understand what you are asking for with such a generic comment.

I have very fond memories of reading that book.

Your last paragraph hit home with me. I also find it refreshing to be clear and direct, have the intent be directly understood, and have a pleasant, good faith, high signal conversation as a result. I hardly ever experience that with humans (I recognize that that’s not ‘everyone else’s fault’ of course).

Just a thought, but: maybe it’s even easier to (as well as do what you suggest, which is a good idea) build and sell buggy (ie backdoored) devices.

What’s easier, marketing or finding bugs :-)

(Not a rhetorical question)

I get your point, but I think that such high risk situations simply are not compatible with common sense, case by case decision making. As a consequence we need some extremely risk averse rules that everyone always follows, no matter how insanely risk averse they sometimes are and everyone in the situation probably knows it and agrees it’s insane.

Because the alternative is a nebulous fog of war where safety decisions are mood, situation, experience, and personality influenced when they shouldn’t be. And when accidents happen we only have difficult to interpret decisions to trace back to. The decisions have to be brainless and black and white.

Could the black and white rules be better? Maybe yes. Then let’s change them carefully.

But I do believe the rules should be black and white, and I personally in this light truly don’t mind I can’t name my Bluetooth device bomb, and I can’t say bomb or joke about having a bomb, no matter how obvious it is that I don’t have one, if that’s the current black and white rules.

Off-topic, but I found his diss track years after the fact and actually reallly respect he could put together and perform a pretty smooth, catchy, witty track in what must have been a stressful time.

I’ve been thinking about this, or a variant of it.

Hypothetically, I’m scared and sad that AI can replace me (it currently can’t, not literally, but a lot of my skill and expertise, built up over say 30 years, that used to be valuable and rare is now cheap to get from an AI).

Let’s try to see the upside. How ‘powerful’ would it make me if, at the cost of my own edge being dulled, can access everyone else’s edge?

I am still my own expert. Now with AI I have a minor expert in everything else as well. What is the best way to use that? don’t have an answer but it’s an aspect I haven’t seen discussed much and I think it is worth bringing up.