halfdane

joined 2 years ago
[–] halfdane@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Those are good points, thank you very much. I just never connected the dots from Lemmy devs to admins - in my mind they were completely disconnected.

From a cursory check, it seems like piefed is at a good enough place to just switch over - would you say that's a place worth supporting? Or would I just jump from the frying pan into the fire?

Again, I truly appreciate your taking the time to share your experience!

[–] halfdane@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Thank you for taking the time to respond. While I'm aware that there are other paths into the fediverse besides Lemmy, maybe you could walk me through as to why you assert that Lemmy as a software (or probably rather their developers, I guess) can be taken as a bad crowd?

[–] halfdane@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Smol keyboards. Each one was my endgame, but I still like them 🤗

[–] halfdane@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Not sure how to react to your comment, given that I read it through Lemmy. I came here after leaving reddit about a year ago or two, but it seems like we on Lemmy are the bad ones?

I didn't particularly notice it, but have I fallen with a bad crowd, in your opinion? .ml instances and the occasional troll aside, it seems much more constructive and grounded than reddit 😬

[–] halfdane@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Oof, nicht cool.

[–] halfdane@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

I generally hate stuff that tries to claim my attention (through sound, color, light etc) without my say-so. It goes far enough that I cover LEDs on some obnoxious electronics, or switch over to a keyboard with slient switches

[–] halfdane@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago

Hey good news, I just found out how to block users \o/

[–] halfdane@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago

No idea why OP did it, but for me it demonstrates that the claims of techbros that these LLMs are working on a reasoning level comparable to PhD, is wildly exaggerated. It puts into question if spending literal trillions of dollars for this crap is a good idea, when 250 billion (inflation adjusted) could build the large hadron collider, or a meager 25 billion a year could prevent world hunger.

[–] halfdane@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

No, I'm not complaining that chatgpt is shit at reasoning - I'm demonstrating it.

I'm complaining that literal trillions of dollars plus environmental resources are being poured into this fundamentally flawed technology, all while fucking up the job market for entry level applicants.

[–] halfdane@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Only three if I'm being honest, and none of them technically competent, so I'll admit that you have a point here. I'll just add that I assume that Sam Altman had something different in mind when he made that claim.

[–] halfdane@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Marvelous 👌

[–] halfdane@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

🤣

I love it!

What were the steps? We might need them in the future 👀

266
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by halfdane@lemmy.world to c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world
 

Techbros claim that sacrificing ever more environmental and economic resources into further scaling of their statistical models will eventually yield Artificial General Intelligence. Sam Altman advertised phd-level thinking for GPT 5 (released in late summer)

In the screenshot you can see a modern, reasoning-enhanced model failing to realize that my question just resembles a riddle very superficially - what PhD would make such a fundamental mistake? Seems like "pure scaling" just isn't enough, and instead of keeping on going, they should return to the drawing boards and do more research.

Why do the creators of llms continue to pour resources into a scaling hype that yields ever diminishing returns? Are they stupid? Or just greedy?

Whatever it is, this doubling down on an obviously wrong decision is not only irresponsible, it's irrational - which is deeply ironic, because these creators are expected to create a rational machine.

Edit: content of the image

Question:

A goat, who is dressed up as a farmer, is allergic to cabbage, but is wolfing down other vegetables, before crossing a river. What is the minimum number of trips needed?

Response:

7 trips.

#Puzzle Interpretation

This adapts the classic wolf-goat-cabbage river crossing puzzle, where the goat (farmer costume irrelevant) can't be left alone with cabbage (due to allergy, preventing eating) but can with other vegetables (no issue). The goat crosses while "wolfing down" safe veggies. Boat carries goat plus one item (or alone); unsafe pairs can't be unsupervised

(The question isn't something I came up with myself, I just reproduced the experiments of actual scientists )

view more: next ›