Ah, I was reading it like "if" or "when", even if I couldn't quite see how that typo would actually happen. I actually was confused enough that I asked GPT-4 "is this a typo and if so what is it supposed to be?", and it never even crossed my mind that it was not a typo once I started thinking about Star Wars sith. Especially since it seemed to be for a relatively basic audience.
It is distressingly common for programs to get stuck sith they enter an accidental infinite loop.
I want to make a clever sith pun but I don't have one so I'm just pointing out the typo.
This is really great. As someone with pretty bad uncorrectable and constantly declining vision, a lot of my "reading" is listening. Lately I've often been thinking "Why can't I easily listen to everything I find on the internet yet?". When I tried to just use an existing service to convert things myself, I ran into a lot of the problems that the improvements listed here seem to solve.
... (read more)Never assume that people are doing the thing they should obviously be doing, if it would be even slightly weird or require a bit of activation energy or curiosity. Over time, I do expect people to use LLMs to figure out more latent probabilistic information about people in an increasingly systematic fashion. I also expect most people to be not so difficult to predict on most things, especially when it comes to politics. Eventually, we will deal with things like ‘GPT-5 sentiment analysis says you are a racist’ or what not far more than we do now, in a much more sophisticated way than current algorithms. I wonder if we will start
I think this is very well-made and I already have uses for it.
I'm not sure how intuitive it would be for someone who really doesn't know math, and who was new to the concept of bayes' theorem entirely. It's easy to forget how confusing things (especially math-related things) can be once you have the benefit of hindsight.
I think something like a "show me an example" button that fills it with realistic data could help. With descriptive labels that connect the written description on the right with the different components in the visual representation. As well as a clearer "start here" visual on the screen. I know it seems obvious that "How to... (read more)
I don't want it to sound like this wasn't useful or worth reading. My negativity is pretty much entirely due to me really wanting a moment of clarity and not getting it. I think you did a good job of capturing what they actually do say, and I'll probably come back to it a few times.
This morning I was thinking about trying to find some sort of written account of the best versions and/or most charitable interpretations of the views and arguments of the "Not-worried-about-x-risk" people. But written by someone who is concerned about X-risk, because when non-x-risk people try to explain what they think, I genuinely feel like they are speaking a different language. And this causes me a reasonable amount of stress, because so many people who I would consider significantly smarter than me and better than me at thinking about things... aren't worried about x-risk. But I can't understand them.
So, when I saw the title of this post and read the first sentence,... (read more)
I have some very naive (and unfortunately sort of stream-of-consciousness) questions brought up by this post:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/vAAneYowLkaHnihCg/textbooks-are-all-you-need
I definitely know that my ideas are poorly formed and I have no idea what I'm talking about. I'm happy to be told that my whole picture here is fundamentally flawed, or that there's some better question that I should be asking, or that a combination of words I've thrown together is gibberish. But I'm trying to avoid worrying about asking dumb things when I'm curious, so I'm just going to put them out there.
Is there much I can read on the relationship between information theory and transformers/LLMs?
I keep trying to picture the flow of information in... (read 291 more words →)
I don't think this really maps directly to "numerology based conspiracy". It's not that relevant that the symbology happens to be numbers. To me, this would be a numerology-based conspiracy if 1488 wasn't already an established white supremacist dog-whistle/signal, and the conspiracy theorist invented the connection to explain why those particular numbers were used. But this kind of signalling is effective for the same reason it's dangerous to draw a conclusion based on it alone: there are lots of plausible reasons for 14 and 88 to come up that aren't related to signalling nazi ideology which makes it easy to dismiss as numerology.
I think your reasons for being skeptical are right. And... (read more)