SpaceManNabs

The US is moving in the same direction.

I am not surprised. Every time I mention the draconian laws around digital speech when flying into london, hackernews historically said I was being ridiculous.

The UK has some of the oddest laws I have seen from a western nation.

Thank you for spending your time to answer my questions.

I thought one of the draws for apple devices was privacy. Wonder how they account for that.

In addition, i know a lot of apple device owners dislike AI integration. For example, my non tech friends turned off a lot of the apple intelligence stuff in the recent big iOS update.

thanks! got any links if you can spare the time? i think the info on gans using transformers might be enough. wasn't aware!

I miss GANs. I understand that they are much harder to train than transformers for the same performance even with high data regime and high parameter regime, but there was such good optimization research and tricks that came out of them.

The work on the capacity of discriminators was super cool.

not affiliated with them and i might be a little out of date but here are my guesses

1. prompt caching

2. some RAG to save resources

3. of course lots model optimizations and CUDA optimizations

4. lots of throttling

5. offloading parts of the answer that are better served by other approaches (if asked to add numbers, do a system call to a calculator instead of using LLM)

6. a lot of sharding

One thing you should ask is: What does it mean to handle a request with chatgpt? It might not be what you think it is.

source: random workshops over the past year.

So are foundational models real finally now?

Are they just multimodal for everything?

Are foundational time series models included in this category?

> Growing up half in England and US I feel British culture is more attuned to the class aspects to this kind of event. Traditionally America likes to pretend this kind of class contempt doesn't exist (think of, people on welfare angry at welfare queens, unaware they will be affected by legislation they support).

As an immigrant to the US from latin america that has spent significant time in britain, this statement is the complete opposite of my experience to the point of ridiculousness.

Britain is the most openly classist western country I have ever been in.

If Japan wants to limit tourists, they can. If they don't, it is because they truly don't want the tradeoff.

Isnt there masked diffusion as well?

one of my interns didn't know how to create a folder.

That isnt my claim. My claim is that they have access to different reaources. Whether that makes a difference it seems not but maybe it does.

Why is it not a fair assessment to say it is comparing two "clients" with different resources if one can do a web lookup and the other cannot?

You note yourself that it was meaningful in another round.

> Also, the web search was only meaningful in the Austria round. It did use it in the Ireland round too, but as you can see by the search terms it used, it already knew the road solely from image recognition.

> Looking forward to the inevitable goalpost-moving of "that's not real reasoning"

It did a web lookup.

It is not comparing humans and o3 with equal resources.

The article does a wonderful job in providing context for the proof.

I really enjoyed the clear descriptions of the three scales.

> Also — secondhand books are generally outdated, undesirable, and/or damaged — do collectors still find diamonds in the rough?

Growing up poor, second hand book stores were how I found some of the best math books that I wouldn't have been able to afford. And they were often quite good or better (at least in offering diverse perspectives and angles) than the books I could have bought at the time.

I often liked the notes people left.

> someone found the good interesting enough to buy it in the first place (1st curation)

I wonder how this is offset by someone finding an item not worth enough to keep. But maybe I underestimate the generosity (or need for income) of the typical person visiting secondhand stores to offload their stuff.

I have found that second hand shops tend to have a more diverse and rich selection and charity shops can have very rare gems.

Support both, and I wouldn't want to give up one for the other.

Also a bit of an aside, but charity shops are also more often part of national or international orgs so a lot of the "gain" isn't localized as the article discusses. Good or bad on a case by case basis. Not sure how it edges out.

i dont think those demos are comparable and cool for sharing your link!

Which documentary? Is it this one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuhECwm31dM

I applaud you for acknowledging your mistake. So many people double down, especially in this pernicious and polarized age.

> Yeah it's surprising that it works from such sparse rewards. I think imagining a lot of scenarios in parallel using the world model does some of the heavy lifting here.

This is such gold. Thanks for sharing. Immediately added to my notes.

Let's look at 2025

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-exzZ-CIUw

It looks pretty awesome. Let's see what happens.

> And that is why it is never going to work in the real world: games have clear objectives with obvious rewards. The real world, not so much.

I encourage you to read deepmind's work with robots.

I just want to express my condolences in how difficult it must be to correct basic misunderstandings that can be immediately corrected from reading the fourth paragraph under the section "Diamonds are forever"

Thanks for your hard work.

If you have an alternative for RL in these use cases, please feel free to share.

When RL works, it really works.

The only alternative I have seen is deep networks with MCTS, and they are quickly to ramp up to decent quality. But they hit caps relatively quickly.

This thread is all you need to know that PG types are ok with losing 10-50% of their equity's value as long as they can play tribal politic games.

PG is on X every day pretty much going "Why is trump doing this? There must be a reason!"

> what strikes me as particularly insane is how it’s not even defensible as a protective measure

You must not have read many of the comments here. Way too many people are trying to defend this just because they don't want to have to admit that they were wrong on Trump being better for the economy.

This is a bunch of nonsense that is not driven by data and not even worth a response.

I am tired of people spitting BS just to defend Trump's inane policies and everyone else having to rederive modern economic trade theory in comments in order to counter it.

Physicists used to get a bunch of derision for thinking their high skills in analytical thinking in physics easily carried over to other fields, and now we have CS majors thinking the same.

Regardless I will do some of the countering:

> what about the former domestic producers who could not compete, and do not have the skills or capital to find a new job which pays as well?

We had a candidates that offered job re-training programs. Those candidates weren't selected and those jobs went away even as we tried to put up protectionist domestic policy.

> our society as such is biased heavily toward importing goods rather than exporting goods.

This is fine. Comparative advantages and all. We just need to produce the goods necessary for national security. It worked out well so far. Do we actually want to have other countries do the high value services and us doing the low value manufacturing???? Why are you justifying engaging in a trade war with Cambodia and Vietnam?

> Tariffs accomplish both of those, raising money at the same time as raising cost of goods and weakening the dollar.

This is not backed by any data. Every single economic thinkthank worth a damn, including conservative ones, have detailed how it will raise the national debt.

I am tired of people saying ridiculous arguments just so they can stave off cognitive dissonance.

Tearing down our soft power and throwig out every trade deal we have carefully crafted since WWII is absolutely ridiculous.