geraneum

Are they trying to push more users towards Chinese models?

> Most parliamentary democracies assume you are electing a person with the knowledge/hope the party leader will be sitting in the big chair at the end.

In Germany the focus is usually on the parties and not the figurehead for over 70 years now.

edit: for the election

The “more features != better” is still a valid principle IMO, and AI doesn’t help with that. Probably is making it worse.

> I'm fine if some of the stuff is having scheduled or unscheduled maintenance.

You might be, and your customers may not! And your competitor could be more than happy to offer a more reliable service.

> Don't take it too seriously.

I didn’t, hence the question.

> How would they have both agreed to use the cache though

I think it’s safe to assume that extracting information using timing in cache is already known in training set, since we have the likes of Specter.

Maybe they visited the website and the existing questions were enough? These stats seems to be questions asked. Maybe that’s the reason.

It’s so cute that some people imagine the armed forces and police were on the other side or are on their side. If you’re average Joe, the police in a tyrannical state are never on your “side”.

Do you foresee that AI will be able to count Rs in strawberry by then?

Jokes aside, by then we're gonna have StarTrek Replicators. Exciting!

So when they release those model, we all will be solving millennium prize problems?

But people do unpaid painting, horseback riding, calligraphy, etc. which are outdated because they love it. Why is it so unfortunate for you?

> And unfortunately, that works pretty well.

Why unfortunately?

There’s no such thing as a read/write head in transformers. You can use it as a metaphor but that’s a leaky metaphor, hence all these misunderstandings.

> In fact it has N read / write heads equal to the size of the context

And what is the asymptotic notation when computation scales linearly with the size of context?

> Either way, the simple truth is that you can train a transformer system

Which still doesn’t mean they have a read/write head or have O(1) complexity for token computation with “infinite context”.

> If the volume of work goes up, its cost goes down. Supply and demand.

What?! Good to know. When contractor comes to do the kitchen, I will make them do the garden as well and will reduce the money I’d pay them, because supply and demand!

> Unless you think you should pay more now for more content

We do already! You realize you’re paying by the token? More token -> bigger bill!

> Same idea for that transformer

It’s not the same for transformers, especially not with the theoretical infinite context. It simply doesn’t process tokens in O(1) in your given setup.

In practice, with frontier LLMs, it’s of course more complicated, and also they don’t reveal how they do lookups, but still the theoretical limit applies regardless.

Do you mind elaborating or perhaps providing some reference as to why you think transformers should be similar to a Turing machine on this specific criteria?

So are you saying they should be paying more for more work but they are not?

> employers would ever pay you the same amount of money to do less work?

Shouldn’t they now pay more for more work?

Then anyone with access to their api’s could’ve come up with these already.

Any basic lookup table is turing complete if you bolt an external infinite tape and read/write head onto it. But then that’s moving the goal post since the context wouldn’t be the “limitless tape” and it’s not a transformer “in the normal way” because turing completeness would be coming from external io and not from auto regressive self attention. Different topic.

> but have stopped hiring for pretty much 4 consecutive years since.

What’s your theory?

Right now, a hiccup in Chinese production of a certain IC may make buying toilet paper harder in Germany! It’s naive to think that such drastic changes (mass unemployment) will not be extremely turbulent (to put it mildly).

Of course it is. You’re conflating a turing machine with a transformer. Transformers don’t have a local read/write head. The [self] attention is over the whole context, which makes each step O(N) at best (with caching) and O(N^2) w/o.

The context acting as a "theoretically limitless tape" while simultaneously the step being O(1) are contradictory. You cannot have it both.

> History shows us that the more free market an economy is, the more prosperous it is.

Ad infinitum? No it doesn’t.

> Prices for software have gone to zero.

On earth?

> Software engineers routinely become millionaires, and some billionaires.

They don’t but if they did, this could mean the opposite of what you think it means.

Have we saturated all tasks that can be done by computers through development?

The hungry needs to eat. If majority are hungry and everything is concentrated in a small group of people, they’ll eat them. Has happened before with lower than 25% rate.

What’s the reason for the stagnation/decline since 2022?

> breaking the company back up into smaller companies that preserve the stability of the workforce.

Blasphemy! Bring the torches!

Absolute free market, like any other idea taken extreme, is cancerous.

> Don't see why it shouldn't

Don't see why it should! Unless there's a harness like in math for other fields.