At what price, tho? He harms children, he hijacked the attention of billions and helped the rise of facism and hate, which if not addressed will lead into very dark times again, all for a measly 3% out perform?
I am confused. My understanding is, that deadpan photography is a very neutral way of photographing things. 99 cents on the other hand was highly digitally altered by gursky, it is not neutral at all. How is it an example for deadpan photography?
My (layman) understanding is, that currently there is a way to monitor the "thoughts" of the LLMs and that by looping more you lose that ability. The danger is presumably an AI that escapes human oversight.
I also need a solution for my addiction. I was thinking of blocking all addictive apps in my main (phone) account and set up a kids account for myself where all the drugs are installed. Then I need to ask myself for screen time. I hope this is annoying enough to not switch accounts constantly. If that doesn't work, I need to give another person the control over the screen time.
This is when Frances Haugen joined Facebook and later leaked documents from that time. So while Facebook probably was harmful before that time, since then we have it on paper.
There are plenty of problems with YAML as the article shows. The biggest problem with YAML is, that serializer and deserializer need to agree on rules outside of the spec, because otherwise they can be both compliant and still don't understand each other.
Pay 25% from your 2025 profit for harming children since at least 2019 and be able to continue doing so. Sounds like a loss for society and a win for Meta.
But can these really be trusted? There was just a HN post which proofed that you can train a model to behave completely different on a certain day. How do we now, that these models do not find a way to call home when they see interesting informations (probably irrelevant on a personal level, but corps, government and military might care).
A German publisher is currently sueing OpenAI, because they think it is distributing unauthorized copies of its work. [1] It's in German, but I think the example picture speaks for itself. So essentially big tech is doing exactly what the torrenters were persecuted for. I still think big tech will be treated differently.
> Amazon is stealing from the customers they said they were here to serve.
I am always surprised that people apparently think corporations want the best for their customers. They want the best for their shareholders. Sometimes the latter overlaps with the former, but mostly that's not the case.
Germany is unfortunately not a good place to do this. The additional fees that you need to pay on top of the actual energy price are simply too high. And currently there is Katharina Reiche in charge which is actively fighting concepts like Energy Sharing.
Does secret injection really prevent that the agent send my GitHub key somewhere? If it has access to it via env var, can it not just paste it somewhere?
Fascinating how a country can dismantle itself. Historians will have a field trip in analyzing this. Just sad that the current population will suffer from this.
But isn't it easier to copy some existing approach than to create it from a green field? ASML tech is presumably highly protected, but China is also very good in spying, hacking etc.
> Below: the share of runs that went poking around the web for it. Filthy cheaters!
I can understand that in their benchmark setting they wouldn't want the model to find an existing solution. But in my day to day work, wouldn't I want the model to search online for the best solution? Am I not shooting myself in the foot by preventing it?