qt31415926

I'm surprised no one at Google realized that both OpenAI and Anthropic's naming schemes follow a fairly clear progression and that they should do something similar to reduce confusion. I would have assumed the opposite given that Argon has a higher periodic number

Ah okay that makes sense. Yeah ultimately I think Nick just gives hypothesis given what he's seen, and I'm not an expert in this field but it does seem to be driven by experimental results rather than mere description.

Personally from reading the article, I felt like it scratched the 'why' itch more than the 'what' itch which presumably is what you mean by explanation vs description but it is fairly dense and I can see how either interpretation would work.

I wouldn't mix up "neurons do one thing" with "each thing lives only in one neuron" since he doesn't claim that.

Re the first paragraph I'm not sure what you mean by "the assumption that conflates multiple concepts that to me are substantially non-overlapping are one and the same thing"

Nick's claim is that that's the fundamental misinterpretation. Each neuron eventually ends up mostly doing one main thing (and the rare case that some neurons do several related things). Neurons compose to embed ideas which is a starkly different interpretation than them being holograms and fractional encodings.

Nick isn't trying to re-claim progressive feature complexity. He's saying that many polysemantic examples were misread because we assumed neurons packed unrelated things together. But also I think what he's claiming if you read the full blog post isn't inconsistent with that paper, where that paper actually isn't itself claiming semantic condensing but geometric condensing. That paper doesn't analyze neuronal firing patterns whereas Nick's trying to analyze what fires together and what doesn't fire.

Article: "How Good Are Frontier Models at Physics? Expert Re-Grading Reveals Broken Evaluations and Near-Saturation of Leading Benchmarks"

John Sous from Yale posted a fairly solid study on how nearly all the physics benchmarks are broken, as they consistently mark correct answers as incorrect.

When hand grading instead, they found out that the models have actually already saturated the benchmarks which is a little bit scary.

You're mistakening Tristan Buckmaster for Sebastien Bubeck. Seb is the one where there's at least 2 (unless the personal friend is Dheeraj) allegations, not Tristan

Isn't that what's solved by this method? Your SSO provider (e.g. Okta) is now what gates each employee's resource access for different MCP resources.

the commenter never said they came up with nothing, they said o3 came up with something better.

On our apps we consistently see a p50 3-4x speed difference between iOS and Android (though there are more lower end android devices). Hard to fathom if it's all due to variability in android devices vs RN being less performant on Android.

Which parts of reasoning do you think is missing? I do feel like it covers a lot of 'reasoning' ground despite its on the surface simplicity

> React doesn't make you a better developer, it makes you a better React developer.

React's pure component functional style translates really well to nearly every other type of software development.

808 ELO was for GPT-4o.

I would suggest re-reading more carefully

A lot of the internet would break if YouTube removed/tweaked their embedded video player so I doubt he has to worry.