Cycl0ps

To an arms manufacturer, being able to blow shit up is a large part of their value. It doesn't give them the right to test munitions in the town square.

OpenAI has demonstrated a clear understanding that their product has an outsized risk to create harm, and that they do not have the capability to monitor and intercept these agents before they cause harm. Any damage caused by their systems is an intentional choice by them and should be treated as such.

Maybe that's a rhetorical question but just in case - the search would always be part of the harness. A model is only handling next-token prediction for a given input. That token may be something like [[web search]] to invoke a tool call but the actual call would be handled by the harness.

It's a downside for some nebulous strawman that just barely exists outside of the support system UBI would provide. Far enough out to not experience the benefits but not far enough to be above it all.

Of course the strawman's proponents will use it as an example of why we should write the whole idea off entirely, rather than test the validity of the concern and discuss options that provide some form of equity to a wider population.

The Zizians would be a good start. As it turns out your sense of reality can be pretty malleable when living inside an echo chamber

I watched the linear regression video. I can see the value behind the idea, but there's a number of flaws that make the videos difficult to watch compared to something like a 3blue1brown video. The flat voice and even word spacing lull you into zoning out, right until a mispronunciation jolts you back.

The idea of using LLMs to write out a script and storyboard for the video is interesting, but I think it needs intermediary work to better instruct the speech and graphics on how to perform.

For a current-day LLM, deviation could be measured as the number of tokens since the agent touched on the prompted topic. A specific <<refocus>> token could even be trained so that a harness or other tooling could direct the LLM back towards the prompted topic if needed.

Or something roughly like that. Generally speaking the goal would be for the LLM to bring the topic back on its own while incorporating the tangent, but a hardcoded, "Let's get back on track" button would probably be needed

>The models don't get better, except when a new one is released.

My brother in Christ this entire thread is talking about the new model that was released

An LLM has a fixed number of ways it can express itself. we can give it an array of 14 billion options but it still has to chose one to output. Humans have no such limitation.

An LLM does not persist in consciousness from one token to the next. Each generation, happening hundreds of times a second, will be initialized, generate an output, and terminate. Humans are not stateless like an LLM.

You're browsing for whatever piques your interest, and the library wants to curate the collection based on what people are interested in. The books that collect interest get placed on the shelves and the ones that don't get archived. If it's in the archive it probably wouldn't have interested you.

Incompetent sycophants