iNow

2 minutes ago, AIkonoklazt said:

The second sentence of the reply shows you've no idea what I'm talking about with regard to formalism.

8 minutes ago, AIkonoklazt said:

There's a very long list of people on my LinkedIn feed that have been frustrated by the seemingly unending and unrelenting hype surrounding LLMs

LinkedIn is largely a cesspool of self promoters and blustery overhyped marketing so this isn’t surprising. 

2 hours ago, AIkonoklazt said:

you definitely didn't understand my argument

Lack of agreement isn’t lack of comprehension. 

2 hours ago, AIkonoklazt said:

Formalism doesn't depend on any version of any tech.

Thanks for sharing. Formalism is an excessive adherence to prescribed forms. Have fun with that. Such is not my style at all.

1 minute ago, swansont said:

They are not the ones who will be convinced by facts, anyway. They’re too far into the cult to be deprogrammed.

And perhaps somewhat interestingly, they tend to say the same thing about “the left.” 

1 hour ago, AIkonoklazt said:

Which of those don't use transformers?

When did I claim none used transformers??

1 hour ago, AIkonoklazt said:

Hope you saw the irony in your own chiding regarding generalizations

Definitely, though at least I’m not claiming things to be impossible like an evangelist based on what are considered now stone age versions of the tech. 

1 hour ago, AIkonoklazt said:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2304.15004.pdf

Thanks. I read that a few months ago and heard them present an updated poster about it at NeurIPS 2023

26 minutes ago, AIkonoklazt said:

there are long lists of search results that you could look up on this yourself,

"Google it, bruh."

Lol. Yeah. I think we're engaged in this topic at different levels. Thanks for your link to a consulting firm. Not helpful beyond confirming for me that you keep making absolute comments about chatbots and ignore the rest of the space. 

26 minutes ago, AIkonoklazt said:

The above talks about products by MS/OpenAI, Google, and Meta. I've seen discussions around ones that are still in development on LinkedIn

Yes, those are the big pricey corporate ones. Have some fun here to learn about a few of the others, as well as how they're scored for performance.

https://huggingface.co/spaces/HuggingFaceH4/open_llm_leaderboard

Or here if you prefer to filter on task type: https://huggingface.co/models

26 minutes ago, AIkonoklazt said:

As for your statement regarding "thousands of new LLMs" each week, I don't think that's really true either

TBH, I don't care what you think. There's nearly 500K at the link above alone. 

50 minutes ago, TheVat said:

The fundamental algorithms of LLM machines has not changed in the past year.

There are, IMO, simply far too many and they are evolving too quickly to make such absolute comments and generalizations. 

15 minutes ago, AIkonoklazt said:

I don't think you knew what you were talking about.

Duly noted

15 minutes ago, AIkonoklazt said:

Every LLM out on the market right now operate on the same "self-attention" principle detailed in that 7 year old paper

Please substantiate this statement, especially given how many thousands of new LLMs are being deployed each week. 

I heard the cells in Petri dish #7 are planning to unionize. 

The bad faith persists. 

50 minutes ago, AIkonoklazt said:

I don't know what prompted you to say that.

The paper "Attention Is All You Need" is around 7 years old now.

And the wolfram link you shared, the one I directly quoted you mentioning, was shared a year ago… and is already badly outdated. Anything from 7 years ago may as well have been typed on a GameBoy

3 minutes ago, AIkonoklazt said:

Wolfram did a very good job explaining LLMs here

That was a year ago. May as well be describing mainframes. 

Or vacuum tubes. 

Or horses and buggies. 

You just keep copy pasting this across forums and across years. 

6 hours ago, TheVat said:

formal programs, as a set of coded instructions, can only embody the syntactic elements of expertise or knowledge, without the semantics (understanding of  meaning)

Q* (pronounced Q-star) may be changing this soon-ish. TBD ATM 

6 hours ago, TheVat said:

[Unconscious] can refer in a literal way to operations like those involuntary ones in the autonomic nervous system and up to the brainstem.

An entirely fair and valid point. Thank you for amplifying it as a relevant correction of my own. 

One of the best things congress could do would be to accelerate processing of asylum claims and worker permits instead of making people who cross wait 5-9 years just for a hearing, but that’s for another thread.

24 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

Do humans still evolve? What is the evidence?

Tens of thousands of people die from flu and Covid before having offspring. 

Every year. 

53 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

2024 IF Biden does not deal significantly with the border issue.  If Biden would deal with the border

What specifically do you propose? He presented his plan to congress that would’ve expanded personnel and enhanced technology and improved efficiency, but they refuse to even bring it up for a vote. Without congressional sign off, the best he can do is deprioritize existing resources and work with border nations… which he’s also doing. 

Facts matter not to voters in the same way vibes do. Nobody grasps that congress is the bottleneck and wouldn’t give Biden credit even if immigration were magically made perfect. 

Education and critical thinking are the only ways to neutralize what’s happening. Nobody cares about policy right now. It’s totally tribal and you aren’t 100% in lockstep with the tribe you get death threats. 

They’d keep calling him open borders Biden even if he closed them completely.

2 hours ago, Luc Turpin said:

intelligence is in all living things

Too bad it's not in all submitted posts.

1 hour ago, Luc Turpin said:

Intelligence emerged from matter, and then evolved by increasing its domination over the environment. This is one way at least forintelligence to have evolved.

Perhaps you don’t realize it, but your argument is circular. You say intelligence is required for evolution and then also say that evolution created intelligence. They cannot both be true. You need to seriously rethink your position. 

If intelligence is required for evolution then how did intelligence itself evolve?

https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday/2024/

19 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I literally laughed out loud...

HNY, mate ✌️

37 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

Could you, please, expand your thought.

So, you mean evolution of the mind. Do I understand correctly?

no

1 hour ago, mar_mar said:

Where those new evolved homo sapiens????

Some of them are interacting with you here. Some are being born anew each day.

1 hour ago, mar_mar said:

Doesn't offspring=intelligence?

Depends on the parent, but I’d wager not yours. 

1 hour ago, mar_mar said:

I see. Life emerged by its own.

Beautiful, isn’t it? Profound and awe inspiring, even. 

2 hours ago, zapatos said:

Is there a replacement term, or is the 'subconscious' no longer considered a valid concept?

All generalizations are wrong all the time, so I really should be cautious here, but the concepts coming from the literature I engage most with focus on activity in certain regions, saturation of various chemicals, spikes in oxygen uptake, neural conductance and the like. 

I suspect the term unconscious is still used as a shorthand for laypeople even in clinical settings like therapy sessions and Vogue articles, but it’s not very useful because it’s not very descriptive and you likely wouldn’t see those same clinicians using it at conference talks or in brief hallway watercooler problem solving sessions.

When you’re sitting at a table that wobbles, me telling you that it’s wobbling because “there’s a gap between the floor and the table leg” isn’t exactly useful information. My stance is that calling parts of the mind “unconscious” is similarly lacking in value.

However, saying the length of Leg3 is 1/8” longer than the length of Legs 1,2,&4… all of which are equally long… IS useful. It’s more precise and specific like when we speak of oxygen uptake spikes in the parietal lobe or nerve conductance rates up the spine and feedback signals from the gut. 

IMO, ”unconscious” is a remnant of times past when our understanding was more tightly constrained. It’s a dying term used more for poetry than precision. 

19 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

Does science operate with such term as sub_conscious?

No. It’s largely a relic term absent in peer reviewed literature and used only to discuss topics with lay people and bait clicks.