cauliflower2718

Painting, too. Not sure how common or uncommon but my landlord explicitly allows painting, as long as it's not a dark color

ChatGPT lets you refuse to allow your content to be used for training (under Preferences -> Data controls), but Prism does not.

Regarding medical information: medical professionals in the US, including your doctor, use uptodate.com, which is basically a medical encyclopedia that is regularly updated by experts in their field. While it's very expensive to get a year long subscription, a week long subscription (for non medical professionals) is only around $20 and you can look up anything you want.

The original title is so much more informative. It might be so informative that many people didn't feel a need to read the article.

Thanks for your engagement but it would help if you read my comment the first two times.

You've personally demonstrated that humans don't have to be reasonable and cooperative, but you're not at all refuting my claim.

My example is asking for way less than what you're asking for.

Here is something I do not see with reasonable humans who are cooperative: Me: "hey friend with whom I have plans to get dinner, what are you thinking of eating?" Friend: "fried chicken?" Me: "I'm vegetarian" Friend: "steak?"

Note that this is in the context of four turns of a single conversation. I don't expect people to remember stuff across conversations or to change their habits or personalities.

Your goalpost is much further out there.

I think this depends on how you measure task.

One common kind of interaction I have with chatgpt (pro): 1. I ask for something 2. Chatgpt suggests something that doesn't actually fulfill my request 3. I tell it how its suggestion does not satisfy my request. 4. It gives me the same suggestion as before, or a similar suggestion with the same issue.

Chatgpt is pretty bad at "don't keep doing the thing I literally just asked you not to do" but most humans are pretty good at that, assuming they are reasonable and cooperative.

+1, I am also big user of PGMs, and also a big user of transformers, and I don't know what the parent comment talking about, beyond that for e.g. LLMs, sampling the next token can be thought of as sampling from a conditional distribution (of the next token, given previous tokens). However, this connection of using transformers to sample from conditional distributions is about autoregressive generation and training using next-token prediction loss, not about the transformer architecture itself, which mostly seems to be good because it is expressive and scalable (i.e. can be hardware-optimized).

Source: I am a PhD student, this is kinda my wheelhouse

I was wondering about this, because the link shows a bunch of birds in the "death zone".

What do you do for managing dependency / tolerance?

I think the author's line between pink and purple is also not very clear. For example, teen spirit appears in both.

This is so cute!! I hope you two are having a lovely life together.

It seems like all of the links to more of their work (e.g. "research on deterministic vs. probabilistic systems") are currently broken.

I've gotten an AI generated email back when I asked for support, which did seem to understand my request at a surface level, but was not actually helpful. That's the extent of support I've received from cursor.

This follows directly from the fact that exp(x+y)=exp(x)exp(y).