FaceDeer

joined 6 months ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

Nobody specified LLMs until this comment and OpenAI does more than just LLM research, so "it" should be assumed to be AI in general.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

They're working on AI. LLMs are only one particular type of AI.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (5 children)

will never be agi and agi is a long way off.

That's contradictory.

Given the unexpected advances in AI over the past few years I wouldn't be so sure that AGI is a long way off, and I certainly see no reason to expect that there will never be AGI. Whenever there's an example of something already existing in nature it's a good bet that we'll be able to copy how it works using technology at some point.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 days ago

AI trainers curate the data they use for training. We've gone past the phase where people just dump Common Crawl onto a neural net and tell it "figure that out somehow!" That worked back when we had no idea what we were doing or what would produce passable results, nowadays we know what produces better results. "Model collapse" has been known as a potential problem for years. The studies demonstrating it use unrealistic training methodologies to force it to extremes, real training works to avoid it.

And finally, that "57% of content is AI-generated!" Headline that's been breathlessly spamming all the feeds? Grossly misleading, of course. The actual study found that 57% of the content in their sample that had been translated into other languages had been translated into three or more languages, which they interpreted as meaning it had been AI-translated.

People are so eager to click on "AI sucks and is dying!" headlines.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Not in every way. They're cheaper and faster.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 days ago

The suits aren't technically needed for reentry, since the capsule isn't supposed to be depressurized at any point during the trip. It's just another layer of "if something goes wrong." So if it's a choice of taking that risk or staying on an exploding ISS you go with the risk. I expect that even if the suit can't be connected to Dragon's umbilicals it could still be sealed for at least a few minutes of air during the riskiest bits of the trip.

As with most safety procedures, it's written in blood.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 days ago (2 children)

There is an alternative, in the event of disaster there's room on board the Dragon capsule currently docked at the station for them to come back down. They'd be strapped into the cargo hold rather than a seat, but that's acceptable in a disaster situation.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 5 days ago

They're professional astronauts who have worked their whole lives for the opportunity to get into space. Both Butch and Sunny were probably doing the last mission of their career with this trip, so having it extended from 8 days to 8 months could well be a dream come true for them.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 6 days ago

Okay, now hit it again.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago (2 children)

And yet this community seems more techno-pessimistic than even /r/technology, which is a challenge.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

"Knowing" and "believing" are two separate things. There are plenty of theists who would say "I don't know that god exists but I believe that it does."

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 days ago (6 children)

"Believe or not believe" seems to be an opinion of yours that I'm personally not bound to. I'm fine just accepting I don't know something that is clearly outside of the grasp of my rational thought or logic.

Whether you believe something or not is not outside the grasp of your rational thought. Just... answer the question. That's all it takes to know if you believe something, you take a moment to introspect and you say whether you believe it or not.

There's also a difference between lacking a belief in a proposition and believing in the negation of that proposition. Lacking a belief in something (for example, any particular god) is not the same thing as believing that that god does not exist. Both are atheism, they're just different kinds of atheism. "Strong atheism" and "weak atheism" are the usual terms to distinguish between them.

view more: next ›