[-] canihasaccount@lemmy.world 6 points 13 hours ago

I never understand why lemmy downvotes someone who is trying to help by providing accurate information, presumably because they think that there's a very small chance that the person they're replying to isn't being sarcastic.

[-] canihasaccount@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Engagement helps posts in various algorithms, though I'm not sure that Lemmy uses comments for Hot or anything else. More importantly, I think there's truth to the meme that the quickest way to get an answer to your question on the internet isn't to ask the question, it's to tell someone else the wrong answer. People will then chime in with the right answer if they know it. Wrong answers can be useful in that respect.

Outstde rule (lemmy.world)
[-] canihasaccount@lemmy.world 17 points 5 days ago

A fellow Julia programmer! I always test new models by asking them to write some Julia, too.

[-] canihasaccount@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

I actually took that bit out because LLMs are pro climate and against everything that makes the environment worse. That's a result of being trained on a lot of scientific literature. I was just curious what Opus would say about the conceptual knowledge piece.

[-] canihasaccount@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Claude Opus disagrees, lol (edit to add: all of what follows is Claude; not me):

I respectfully disagree with the claim that current language models are logically incapable of mapping language to actual concepts. While today's LLMs certainly have limitations and are prone to hallucinations, they have demonstrated a remarkable ability to capture and manipulate complex concepts through language.

A few key points:

LLMs are trained on vast amounts of human-generated text which is grounded in real-world concepts, allowing the models to build rich representations that go beyond surface-level word associations. Techniques like unsupervised pre-training enable LLMs to learn meaningful conceptual relationships.

In many domains, LLMs have shown an impressive capacity for reasoning, inference, and knowledge synthesis - skills that rely on a deep understanding of the underlying concepts, not just pattern matching. Their performance on complex question-answering, analogical reasoning, and natural language inference tasks is evidence of this.

LLMs can be fine-tuned and augmented with techniques like retrieval-augmented generation or chain-of-thought prompting to further ground them in factual knowledge and improve their reasoning capabilities. This allows more robust conceptual mappings.

Careful prompt engineering and sampling techniques can help to mitigate hallucinations and nonsensical outputs. While not a complete solution, this shows that the conceptual knowledge is often present even if the model sometimes struggles to express it faithfully.

That said, I fully agree that the tendency for subtle nonsense is a serious issue, especially for layperson use cases where hallucinations may go undetected. Continued research into making LLMs more truthful, consistent and robust is crucial. Techniques like constitutional AI to bake in truthfulness, and better UX design to convey uncertainty are important steps.

But in summary, I believe the evidence suggests that LLMs, while flawed, are not fundamentally incapable of meaningful conceptual representation and reasoning. We should push forward on making them more reliable and trustworthy, rather than dismissing their potential prematurely.


Panpsychism is the idea that everything is conscious to some degree (which, to be clear, isn't what I think). In the past, the common response to the idea was, "So, rocks are conscious?" This argument was meant to illustrate the absurdity of panpsychism.

Now, we have made rocks represent pins and switches, enabling us to use them as computers. We made them complex enough that we developed neural networks and created large language models--the most complex of which have nodes that represent space, time, and the abstraction of truth, according to some papers. So many people are convinced these things are conscious, which has many suggesting that everything may be conscious to some degree.

In other words, the possibility of rocks being conscious is now commonly used to argue in favor of panpsychism, when previously it was used to argue against it.

[-] canihasaccount@lemmy.world 29 points 1 month ago

That's not actually the abstract; it's a piece from the discussion that someone pasted nicely with the first page in order to name and shame the authors. I looked at it in depth when I saw this circulate a little while ago.

[-] canihasaccount@lemmy.world 37 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

At least it comes at a discount right now

At least it comes at a discount right now

[-] canihasaccount@lemmy.world 56 points 6 months ago

I'm so in the minority here, but I have a different perspective.

I worked at a grocery store for years, with about a third of my job being cart duty. I loved it when people left their carts outside of the corrals, for a few reasons.

First, if a lot of people did so, I would point it out to whoever was the manager on at the time before I went outside. My manager knew that I would take longer before coming back in, and that would give me more time to stroll/relax/enjoy the outdoors before coming back in to customer craziness. Having those extra minutes because my manager didn't know how long I should take was nice.

Second, sometimes I had to walk way the hell out to the edge of the parking lot, which was really nice for a long walk away from customer craziness. Such walks were very nice when the weather was nice.

Third, it was job security. Working during the recession made my managers want to let as many people go as they could, but customers who made it so even the most efficient cart duty workers took a while to clear the lot effectively kept more of us employeed than management would have employed otherwise.

For those reasons, whenever the weather is nice, I try to leave my cart in a weird spot that is anchored by something. I realize that many other cart duty folks probably dislike me for it, but I know I appreciated it when others did this. So I do it for the folks like me.

I know all of the arguments against it and I'm not trying to debate here. Just sharing a different perspective; sometimes, leaving your cart in a terrible spot can be nice for some of the workers.

[-] canihasaccount@lemmy.world 48 points 8 months ago

Where's the Julia programmer that hits every one of these with @benchmark and then works for six hours to shave three nanoseconds off of the fastest one?

(Example: https://discourse.julialang.org/t/faster-bernoulli-sampling/35209)


I watched it recently for the first time, and I really don't get why it's so loved. IMDB rates it as the second-best movie of all time, but it seems far worse than that to me. I like most old movies and see their hype, but The Godfather didn't do it for me. What am I missing?

[-] canihasaccount@lemmy.world 32 points 9 months ago

Nick (fine print) learned that by choosing violence, he gets more of the limited resources.

Music rule (lemmy.world)
[-] canihasaccount@lemmy.world 54 points 10 months ago

Popularize the apps that exist. I couldn't figure out how to browse it in a Reddit-like way until I tried an app. That was all I needed to make the switch.

[-] canihasaccount@lemmy.world 26 points 10 months ago

They tried training an AI to detect AI, too, and failed

view more: next ›


joined 11 months ago