uargos

It's not knowledge, it's belief.

Which asks the question of what knowledge is. Can knowledge be super human ? Or is knowledge a human matter ? If so (like i believe), then what those ai labs are doing is far from the end of the story. Because the goal of science is not to produce a certificate of something, but more to produce an explanation that can fit in a human brain, that can be reasoned on, and that can be retargeted. In this sense, producing a million lines proof is not really producing knowledge, even less so doing science.

Risk assessment is entirely part of mountaineering, and other risk-encompassing outdoor activities. Decision boundary to go or not go is never a sharp line, and it's always relative to your capacities, your knowledge, and ability to continually assess the risks while practicing.

It is simple to craft the story around an accident in retrospect, but on the field the story is never that simple. If you read accidents reports (like AAC), you will probably never see accidents coming straight from one bad decision, at the beginning of the day, on one particular aspect. It is usual though to see failure about acknowledging changing conditions, multi-factor risks, or even failure to acknowledge high risk/low difficulty transitions by experienced people.

It's also why it is called engagement. Some people are willing to put their life on the line to achieve a moonshot project. But they usually know the risk they are taking.

Llms never took a difficult on field decision, never had to turn gut feeling into calls. If you were experienced enough in both machine learning and mountaineering, you would know a lot of this decision taking is pre-verbal, and is probably very lightly represented in training sets, if at all.

This is an Easter Egg isn't it ?

What I don't understand is, with all the good tui frameworks/applications existing these days, how was Claude opus/sonnet/whatever not able to help anthropics engineer implement a normal approach ?

I mean man, react before rasterizing ? Did any try that before ?

That's clearly not what I would consider a good ad for their technology...

Very little people seem to understand that.

And actually there is no need to go as far as “universe” to get to something that can’t be captured by language. Human existence is such an example.

For this reason I don’t think llms are going to be good film makers for instance. Sure an llm will be able to spit the scenario of the next action movie, those already seem to be automatically generated anyway. But making a film that resonates to humans takes a lot that can’t be formulated with language.