hackerlight

P(correct) doesn't go down with token count if you have self-correction. It can actually go up with token count.

It's quite fitting that the topic of this thread is self-correction. Self-correction is a trivial existence proof that refutes what LeCun is saying, because all the LLM has to say is "I made a mistake, let me start again".

Mostly terrorists are dead and this killed far less civilians than the alternative ways of waging war (ground invasion or bombing campaign). This is the level of surgical operation that everyone was calling for since Hezbollah declared war on Israel on October 8th, and now that Israel is delivering that level of precision there's still some people complaining, it's unbelievable how naive some people are.

You should start by outlining the definition of terrorism, but by that point it would be obvious it isn't terrorism and such a post would have been unnecessary.

It's good we have different states/schools trying different things, all within the realm of sensible ideas. This creates natural experiments which will be studied in detail, and which will guide evidence-based policymaking.

There's enough plausible evidence linking social media to problems in youth that we have to bite the bullet and try something, then reassess afterwards, rather than be caught in analysis paralysis about what may go wrong with attempts to fix the issues.

They should be allowed to have the same access to and benefit of AI as any regular American business or individual. That is, access through an API. It's the secret sauce that I believe should be kept under wraps as a state secret.

They relied on the taxpayer to fund their de facto customer service. It's like aged care homes overusing a public ambulance service instead of hiring an on-call doctor or nurse. Or shops not hiring security and overusing police resources.

Public services are there to be used, but there's a line that gets regularly crossed by profit-seeking entities who do not optimize for public good and see public resources as something to be used up as much as possible as long as they can save a dollar.

chat.lmsys.org --> "Leaderboard" tab --> "Coding" drop-down selection

Or the scale.ai private benchmarks

Open sourcing benefits everyone equally. Given that the US is currently ahead, it's helping China to make gains relative to the US that would have been very difficult otherwise. It's leaking what should be state secrets without even needing the CCP to do the hard work of espionage.

If it was liberal minded people like Deng as leader of China and Gorbachev as leader of Russia I would care a lot less and may even be in favor of open source despite their autocratic system. They'd be trending towards another Singapore at that point. Although I'd still be uneasy about it.

But I'm looking at the present moment and see too many similarities with the fascist dictatorships of the past. The nationalism, militarism, unreasonable border disputes and territorial claims and irredentist attitudes. The US just isn't that, despite their history.

US has to win the race because while it's true that it's no angel, it isn't an authoritarian dictatorship and there isn't an equivalence in how bad the world will end up for you and me if the authoritarian side wins the race. Monopoly power will get abused the most by the least democratic actors, which is China. We need multiple actors within the US to win to balance power. We don't need or want China to be one of the winners. There is no upside for humanity in that outcome.

The US policymakers have figured this out with their chip export ban. Techies on the other hand, probably more than half the people here, are so naive and clueless about the reality of the moment we are in, that they support open sourcing this tech, the opposite of what we need to be doing to secure our future prosperity and freedom. Open source almost anything, just not this. It gives too much future power to authoritarians. That risk overwhelms the smaller risks that open sourcing is supposed to alleviate.

Well, Ilya doesn't think that. He's firmly in the Hinton camp, not the Lecun camp.

China can not win this race and I hate that this comment is going to be controversial among the circle of people that need to understand this the most. It is damn frightening that an authoritarian country is so close to number one in the race to the most powerful technology humanity has invented, and I resent people who push for open source AI for this reason alone. I don't want to live in a world where the first superintelligence is controlled by an entity that is threatened by the very idea of democracy.

This is not a trivial point. Selective pressures will push AI towards unsafe directions due to arms race dynamics between companies and between nations. The only way, other than global regulation, would be to be so far ahead that you can afford to be safe without threatening your own existence.

  "French electricity prices turned negative as a drop in demand and surging renewables output prompted some nuclear reactors to power down."

The sensible thing will be to use renewables on top of nuclear rather than overbuild nuclear, like what France is doing. But that will also eat into capacity factor when it's more windy and sunny like what France experiences.

Just something to keep in mind when you hear people talk about nuclear costs. Multiply it by at least 1/0.7 if they haven't taken this into account.

Which saves on labor and land use costs, which is why it's a big deal.

Similar. Retail panels can go as low as $0.2/W for the end consumer, so assume that manufacturing costs are $0.1-0.16/W for standard solar panels.

But these are translucent. They'll be put onto windows. So even if they're 50% more expensive, it's serving an adjacent use-case.

The more interesting figure is they're getting 160W/m^2. That's very large, and it'll be a big deal considering there is more vertical surface area than rooftop area on buildings. Standard solar panels get about 220W/m^2.

Skeptical about (c), source please. She did say they don't have anything much better than GPT-4o currently, but GPT-5 likely only started training recently.

Reminds me of the AlphaCode approach.

Why do you say it's sampling programs from "training data"? With that choice of words, you're rhetorically assuming the conclusion.

If he only sampled 20 programs, instead of 8000, will we still say the programs came from "training data", or will we say it's genuine OOD generalization? At what point do we attribute the intelligence to the LLM itself instead of the outer loop?

This isn't meant to be facetious. Because clearly, if the N programs sampled is very large, it's easy to get the right solution with little intelligence by relying on luck. But as N gets small the LLM has to be intelligent and capable of OOD generalization, assuming the benchmark is good.

Winter being a problem really depends on location. Seasonal variability is much lower near the equator. Also batteries are becoming a solved tech. Also wind is anti correlated with solar, it's stronger in winter and at night. So you want 50-50 to minimize the need for storage.

This got innocent people killed. In a just world, those responsible would be in prison, but instead they just got another $0.5bn contract.

It's cost prohibitive, a small hybrid system costs $4000usd which exceeds the average annual income of many equatorial countries. But you are right that if somehow everyone could install this system (along with an AC and the construction of an airtight room) then wet bulb events would be manageable.

You can't install aircon into a shack. The cold air will escape.

There are often blackouts while the sun is shining in lower income countries.

Wet bulb events aren't that simple to deal with. Grid stability doesn't exist in any of the poor and hot equatorial countries. Many people don't even have airtight housing which rules out aircon. If it was too cold instead they could just add clothing and blankets and survive.

AMD is at a much higher PE ratio. Is the market expecting AMD to up its game in the GPU sector? Or is the market expecting a pullback in GPU demand due to possibility for non-GPU AI solutions becoming the frontier or for AI investment to slow down?

The founders still get preferential access to it, but because they really have taken more risk

It's not related to risk, at least not directly. It's related to the supply of entrepreneurship as a factor of production. Entrepreneurship is scarce, so founders have leverage in any bargaining situation against early employees, who are more numerous and therefore less valuable and less powerful. If 10x the number of people tried to become founders, then founders would hold less leverage and the equity terms would become more "fair" because they'd have no choice but to give generous terms if they wished to hire people.

The $1M ARC prize is advertising, just like being #1 on the huggingface leaderboard. It won't matter for end consumers, but for attracting the best talent it could be valuable.

Amazon Mechanical Turk workers, who might not be 100 average IQ but wouldn't be far off that.

Why does the existence of ChatGPT reduce the risk of disintermediation?