leobg

Using the word “Nazi” to disapprove of someone you don’t agree with is extreme, and it is indecent. Look at the footage that your military took when they liberated Dachau. That was the work of Nazis. That is the meaning of that word. Nazis were mass murderers with no regard for human life. Babies were thrown into the flames alive. Families dragged into the forest and mowed down - the elderly last, so they’d have to watch their kids and grandkids be murdered before they would die themselves. So take one moment and reflect. Is there anything happening today that you could reasonably call by the same name?

The oddest thing about this, to me at least, is that they pick that as their showcase. Did they themselves not notice? Or did they think their potential customers wouldn’t? Not sure really which of the two is worse.

Should be: 2006.

(Not the headline. The announcement. Haha)

Do look up CG Jung and the concept of the shadow and its projection.

There are many people who believe the opposite, btw. Earth has a disease. And the disease is called man. The world would be better off without humans, etc. Say that in a pub - you’ll get nods. But say you want humanity to populate the universe, and people will think there’s something wrong with you. Says less about the speaker and more about those who listens, if you ask me…

I always wonder: How is it that wanting to deport billionaires to cleanse society of their power is “left”, wanting to deport jews to cleanse society of theirs is “right”, and that those are to be considered not the same (say, scapegoating), but opposites?

In the sense of increasing consumer choice. Like railroads - not everyone was able to afford it, much was destroyed because of it, and a small elite got rich enough from it for generations. But still it increased consumer choice, both directly (you can go somewhere by train) and indirectly (you can buy beef in NYC).

There are multiple levels:

1. Pretraining 2. Instruction / chat tuning 3. RLHF

The sentence did not exist in 1 (nobody on Reddit said this, and it was also never encountered in any libgen books). It was introduced in 2 and reinforced in 3. If you stick to the base models, you’re not gonna see it (first generation only, of course).

Did you just admit to being a bot? :)

Because copyright is a tradeoff. Society wants information to be free. But authors won’t publish if anyone can republish their work for free. Hence the distinction: The ideas you write are not protected - only your expression is.

In a sense, AI changes nothing. Society profits from having AI just as it profits from having people learning from others. In both cases, those who stand on the shoulders of others still make money for themselves. But the economy as a file is richer, too, because people can choose to buy something better now that wasn’t available before.

Sounds like an argument for aristocracy.

Sounds like an interesting way to benchmark models. Put two instances of a model in a loop with itself. Run for n cycles. Then look at the output.

And by the way, I would really love to somewhere find a log file of your personal life and see how often you have promised something, and it didn’t turn out quite to be as perfect as you thought, or took longer than you thought. Or were you perhaps thought that you had achieved a goal when somebody from the outside might disagree. Difference between you and someone in the spotlight is that for them such a log exists; for you it doesn’t.

You are removing agency from everyone who is not visible, even though they might buy trash and make it profitable for thousands of sellers on Amazon to lie, and to fraudsters to lie, etc.. Pointing fingers at those who are the most visible and happened to be richer than you is something that people have always done as it is so convenient. It becomes even more convenient if those people have money, so you can turn the punishment into robbery. Doing good and distributing wealth at the same time. How convenient! Greetings from Germany.

> You can make more of these electrical slow waves through an auditory stimulus, if it comes at just the right time.

I wonder: 50ms of pink noise at the right time to make your sleep more restorative. Why or how should such a “backdoor” have evolved? Sleeping by a crackling fire? Pure coincidence, like a bug in the system that never made enough of a difference to come under selection pressure?