rybosome

Can it not be studied with open weight models? This is a genuinely curious question, not an attempt at scoring a point.

Correcting someone about the fact that “The Department of War” doesn’t exist is pedantic.

I wouldn’t go downvote a random comment making the correction, but if I posted a substantive comment remarking on current events and received a reply only pointing out that “it’s ACTUALLY the Department of Defense” then I’d definitely downvote that.

Correcting others’ language on this point isn’t saving democracy, it’s needling others on technicalities who very well might be largely aligned with your views. I think the altered name is clownish and reflects the buffoonery of everybody in charge, but I might still use it when making a point because using it in context is not an endorsement.

I'm not the OP, but this is exactly my interpretation, and my gripe with the homepage as well in lacking this concise yet powerful example. You can tell a lot about a programming language by looking at the right snippet.

Very much agreed on the significance.

The lack of a true airgap should have been identified as a critical weakness and addressed with not only additional layers trying to prevent escape, but at minimum an alarm which would page a human when escape did occur.

My guess is this occurred in a setting where, to be frank, there were too many researchers and not enough software engineers and SREs.

All of the systems which were initially built largely or exclusively by researchers - inference, evaluation, training - are at the level of complexity and significance that they need systems experts. Maybe some teams don’t have access to them. I know plenty of software engineers are employed at OAI but I’d wager they’re concentrated in inference and training, rather than evaluation?

The ironic part is if you had presented this setup to chatGPT and asked how to improve it and if it was good enough, you’d have gotten a ton of actionable suggestions which would have mitigated or prevented this.

I also learned about tree today and second this sentiment. What a delightful perspective to consider it a discovery buzz.

> Like we either live in a world with freedom or we don’t, and like many Americans who have come before, I’m willing to give my life to fighting for it. That’s the real plan America deserves, not some totalitarian dystopia where you think you know what’s good for me better than I do. A nation of free men, not a bunch of pussies who are so worried about what their grown up neighbors might do.

Absolutely yuck. Regardless of whatever other points were made, “A nation of free men, not a bunch of pussies” is a disgusting thing to say.

I actually do believe that prior to any intelligence explosion, a proliferation of strong local models is the best of all the not necessarily great options regarding the future of AI. So in this sense I am in agreement with some of what he’s saying, and for some of the same reasons - not trusting government or a small handful of large corporations to own it, primarily.

But to equate a thoughtful argument for regulation with cowardice, in the face of real unknowns and real dangers - and to use a really gross term for it - ruins his points.

Loved this, cleared all the puzzles available in one go. Thanks for making and sharing!

Thanks for the reply!

I agree with your points about weak typing and coercion being prevalent. Having had direct negative experience with it across 3 of the 4 languages you named, I was prepared to marshal an argument about it most definitely being a source of bugs.

> it should be obvious that this is a historical treatise

It wasn’t obvious to me. Might I suggest amending it to make that more clear?

I do appreciate the tutorial and your commentary though, it gave me a new perspective on MUMPS.

Quite agree.

Some very novel ideas for the time. I’m not a PL historian but can’t think of an earlier language with such a complex runtime to support it.

But, woof - no thanks to the stringly typing. The article under discussion treats this as a positive, saying it eliminates conversion and having to worry about it. I don’t believe that’s possible, and would bet my life savings that MUMPS interpreting a string as a number when the programmer didn’t intend it, or vice-versa, is a reasonably common class of bugs in MUMPS programs.

The tutorial seems really good, but I’m frustrated with parts like that (or the explanation on a lack of operator precedence) which try to frame a bad thing as a good thing.

In this sense it reads like the autobiography of a presidential candidate; written in a calculated way to minimize flaws.

I’d be interested in hearing more detail on that. I’m actually surprised you were able to get the compiler, I assumed it would be expensive and proprietary.

Vote for not weird.

I’m the same way. If I’m writing a prompt and realize I didn’t say “please” in my request I’ll go back and add that in.

As you said, I have no interest in purposefully engaging in hostility even if there’s an accuracy increase from it.

Part of it is irrational and just who I am - I also feel bad being evil in video games. But I also agree with another commenter suggesting that it’s not in your best interest to train yourself to communicate with hostility; that slowly poisons your own well.

And finally, I do believe that if and when machine sentience is achieved, it won’t be immediately clear and obvious. Pretty miserable way for a mind to come into the world, if every interaction is an insult.

I believe that exact framing of Uncharted is the origin of the term “ludonarrative dissonance”, where the character’s motivations and morals are in contrast to the extreme violence they are committing because of the nature of it being a video game.

Definitely one of those things I didn’t question when I was younger, but as I get older it’s hard not to see it.

EDIT: I was wrong, the term originated from an analysis of Bioshock, but Uncharted was later held up as a strong example of this. And it’s more generally about the contrast between narrative and gameplay mechanics.

I had no idea. Did you take part in it?

Typically I would feel that this sort of thing is "cheating" and takes away from the fun of a game, but in this case it didn't have that effect on me. The rare loot hunt wasn't what pulled me in so much as the simple joy of grinding away at monsters and hanging out with friends.

The drop rates on dreamcast were absolutely broken, some weapons had a literal one-in-a-million (or worse!) chance at dropping. I spent over 200 hours playing the game, and the only legitimate rare I ever found was a double-saber, which isn't even that rare.