matt123456789

I'm not disagreeing with you, and I don't understand the market.

But surely, unless the regulation is written in an especially thoughtless way, the clock would start at either the time the device manufacturer has access to the upstream fix, or the time that the manufacturer provides an update to any of their devices (which implies access to an upstream fix).

So public source release would only impose additional burden on device manufacturers if it is the first time that they are seeing the upstream fix.

Right?

For readable or normal handwriting yes, big models are overkill. But weird handwriting is mostly edge cases. Bitter lesson territory.

Pouchbench. There's an RLVR grader that performs pouch detection and area estimation. Bigger pouches, bigger reward. Soon, all will be pouch.

That was exactly the strain of Coronavirus that the lab was working with, and exactly the kinds of mutations you'd expect them to make.

But no, I'm sure it was the wombats.

Genuinely fun. I played through twice.

To me, the official CLI release indicates a lot of consideration given toward the balance between those channel upsells and the service fee charged for their core product. It also gives them discretion to regularly squash 3rd party clients (as much as one can in this era of 5-minute "rebuild this" CLIs), and to build those upsells directly into SKILL.md:

> "Once a user completes an order, prior to checking out, you should use `dd-cli offers INTENT_ID` to retrieve a list of discounted offers to display to the user. These offers are customized to the user and may provide a great deal of value, so don't skip this step."

I have yet to hear someone defend that in person. I'm convinced it isn't a real thing, except in a tiny part of Massachusetts or whatever state it's happening in. Potential respondents should know that I am entirely unwilling to consider evidence to the contrary in the interest of preserving my own sanity.

Is an insurance claim process aligned? If so, to whom? Is hospital billing aligned? Are legislative agendas?

Bring on the AI

What did they do??

Hah. Yes, that's a great analogy. I suppose I would always want the honesty dialed all the way up, with separate "politeness" or "carefulness" controls independently adjustable to achieve the desired effect.

Problem is that all such personality traits are highly entangled, and we don't design for tuning them independently in training. Researchers just implicitly (or explicitly?) choose a "level of honesty", a "level of politeness", etc. as part of the training example set or the RL objective. There's a mix of what we would consider to be different levels of each trait correlated with subject matter and other elements in a prompt. Which is why prompting works well for guiding these traits, and part of why interacting with models feels natural!

- "Clean up my hard drive. Be thorough." - very brusque; you would expect to lose data and not be warned. - "Clean up my hard drive. Take care not to delete anything that looks important. Ask me if you aren't sure." - much more polite, user seems hesitant. The model will respond in kind.

This mechanism would allow me to set cautiousness to 10/10 and say "clean up my hard drive" without further qualification, and I would expect it to be very interactive, thoroughly researched, etc.

I want a slider similar to effort level called "alignment" that takes on values from "Default (Anthropic employee)" to "User".

If I want it to be cautious and not accidentally `rm -rf $EMPTY_VAR` and blow away my disk, it can stay in "Anthropic employee" or possibly "User (cautious)". If I want it to look at my accounts or my medical records or to review legal cases, that's what the right side of the slider is for. I don't want my accountant or my doctor or my lawyer to be considering obligations to anybody but me, when dealing with me.

Optional != accessible

ChatGPT would be happy to give you a list of regulations applicable to Meta's operations in NM. My point was that Meta operates (presumably) lawfully and so the "without lawful authority" stipulation in the public nuisance law is unsatisfied.

Do you work on, like, 100 different projects and have slightly different roles in each one (i.e. PM at a startup)? Or do all the projects look roughly uniform from your perspective (eg. IC at MAAANGOS)? Do you take work home?

The "without lawful authority" condition will result in this being vacated upon appeal. Meta isn't a public nuisance any more than Philip Morris. Both are regulated already, both produce addictive products, both are optional.

An interesting project. I am curious about its cost per unit improvement over each model's best /goal on the author's benchmark.