

Everything you just said applies to proprietary software but worse lol
Everything you just said applies to proprietary software but worse lol
Nah, my old mobile phone is in a drawer in my basement.
it seems too flimsy
Okay, then the cops will have no problem proving you were elsewhere at the time, if its a lie. Until they’ve proved it and convinced a jury of that, you’re 100% innocent.
Seriously, it’s not your concern as a defendent to prove your innocence. If they can’t prove you’re lying about such a flimsy alibi, then what kind of case could they possibly have against you anyway?
The commenter is still completely wrong, then. In that case there is no due process and you’re just guilty because people with guns say so.
Wrong, that’s the opposite of how reasonable doubt works. It is the prosecutor’s job to prove beyond doubt that the defendent is guilty of the charges. The defendent does not need to prove they are innocent.
If the prosecutor can’t prove that the defendent is lying about the alibi, then they’ve failed at their job.
If it can power up and decrypt the docker volumes on its own without prompting you for a password in your basement, it will also power up and decrypt the docker volumes on its own without prompting the robbers for a password in their basement
the Top section of each wikipedia article is already a summary of the article
Yes, and the post title is just the title of the article 🤦
You never clicked on the link, did you?
loses the argument “we’re at the age-old internet stalemate!” LMAO
American exceptionalism definitely sucks, but this is not an example of American exceptionalism. The source is an article from an American magazine, published for an American audience.
Yeah I mean the tax payers have literally already paid for all of both SpaceX and Starlink. The public paid for it, the public should own it.
There is a distinction between data and an action you perform on data (matrix maths, codec algorithm, etc.). It’s literally completely different.
Incorrect. You might want to take an information theory class before speaking on subjects like this.
I literally cannot be wrong that LLMs cannot think or reason, there’s no room for debate, it’s settled long ago.
Lmao yup totally, it’s not like this type of research currently gets huge funding at universities and institutions or anything like that 😂 it’s a dead research field because it’s already “settled”. (You’re wrong 🤭)
LLMs are just tools not sentient or verging on sentient
Correct. No one claimed they are “sentient” (you actually mean “sapient”, not “sentient”, but it’s fine because people commonly mix these terms up. Sentience is about the physical senses. If you can respond to stimuli from your environment, you’re sentient, if you can “I think, therefore I am”, you’re sapient). And no, LLMs are not sapient either, and sapience has nothing to do with neural networks’ ability to mathematically reason or use logic, you’re just moving the goalpost. But at least you moved it far enough to be actually correct?
This behavior is associated with autism
LOL you didn’t really make the point you thought you did. It isn’t an “improper comparison” (it’s called a false equivalency FYI), because there isn’t a real distinction between information and this thing you just made up called “basic action on data”, but anyway have it your way:
Your comment is still exactly like saying an audio pipeline isn’t really playing music because it’s actually just doing basic math.
To write the second line, the model had to satisfy two constraints at the same time: the need to rhyme (with “grab it”), and the need to make sense (why did he grab the carrot?). Our guess was that Claude was writing word-by-word without much forethought until the end of the line, where it would make sure to pick a word that rhymes. We therefore expected to see a circuit with parallel paths, one for ensuring the final word made sense, and one for ensuring it rhymes.
Instead, we found that Claude plans ahead. Before starting the second line, it began “thinking” of potential on-topic words that would rhyme with “grab it”. Then, with these plans in mind, it writes a line to end with the planned word.
🙃 actually read the research?
Yes, neural networks can be implemented with matrix operations. What does that have to do with proving or disproving the ability to reason? You didn’t post a relevant or complete thought
Your comment is like saying an audio file isn’t really music because it’s just a series of numbers.
The cheaper energy becomes, the more of a threat it is to literally all of the world’s heirarchies of power. The people at the top that benefit most from these heirarchies and who have the most control are also the most disincentivized from finding a solution that makes energy cheaper for all.