20 comments

[ 2.2 ms ] story [ 40.0 ms ] thread
(comment deleted)
Never seen that one before:

"Insufficient Storage

The method could not be performed on the resource because the server is unable to store the representation needed to successfully complete the request. There is insufficient free space left in your storage allocation.

Additionally, a 507 Insufficient Storage error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request."

I can't see where you can try this out, so at the moment it's a lot of claims and no real evidence. Also the text feels like it was written by an LLM.

If it's really such a small model why not provide a web interface where we can test it for ourselves?

This feels like high risk of being crackpottery.

It was definitely written by an LLM, the entire article is full of “it’s not X, it’s Y” overconfident truisms
Yep:

> The relation between them always has to be supplied, and supplying it is what the system’s logic is.

100% sure this is Claude's recent writing style at work

And all illustrations have the AI look (they're not AI images, but AI-generated SVG or Powerpoint or something)
It's really a nitpick but putting a big, obvious AI generated slop photo at the top of your post is a signal for bad quality content. I would recommend to avoid doing it.
And using AI's favourite phrase, a deep dive, is also offputting.

(I mean, is he grading the dive?)

I wouldn't even mind it if it weren't so blatantly lazy (lazier). It's always that off-putting overly busy default look. Like, you couldn't even be bothered to ask for some refinement.
> A large language model is trained to predict the next word of a piece of text. … simply asking a model to “think step by step” makes its answers better.

I thought both these statements were no longer held to be broadly true? At least in big lab or frontier models.

This might have been written by someone suffering from AI psychosis.
When I read the title, I thought this was a joke and the article would just say: "Think by yourself".

Although that's arguably way superior to AI-style reasoning.

I want to believe… but..
Chicanery! As others have stated, this is total AI slop. How do these things get upvoted?
Ironically it seems to have been made by LLM ...?
As a Prolog enthusiast and someone who had followed Newell & Simon's SOAR work etc., this was intriguing. There are some respositories that seem related: https://github.com/pcoz/operational-representation-of-system... But, it is disappointing that the summary does seem to be AI-generated slop and I can't find code reproducing the claims as described.