If your "proof" can't port to Humans then it's not proof Learn to take a hint. I'm not going to argue this on human terms because you're playing a dumb um-akshually game. Computer reasoning systems can solve vastly more…
Humans provide increasingly wrong answers as questions get more complex too. Human this, Human that. LLMs aren't humans. "My model is crap but the human brain isn't very good at this either" is irrelevant when we have…
This is where the terminology becomes a bit annoying, but there is a key difference in the kinds of reasoning at work here. When you ask LLMs to provide a reasoning, the actual reasoning performed is linguistic; The LLM…
This is setting the bar way too high. No. If these things are claimed to be sources of truth, then the bar needs to be that high. It is precisely because people don't fact-check that the bar has to be so high.
All this under the auspices of "ethics", which as a reminder, is just an arbitrary set of rules which someone is trying to pass off as having a divine origin. They are arbitrary only in the sense that, sans a religion's…
Remember that database rights are a thing. One cannot hold copyright facts, but one can "copyright" a collection of facts like a search index or a map.
"Living History" is a well crafted written experience, not procedurally generated slop. The issue here is that LLMs can only act in-character if the world has already been built and written, if the prompts are so…
but you can tune your prompts so that 100% of the time they give you a valid result in the result You can't though, that's the issue. Illustrative here are tokens like "SolidGoldMagikarp", but this does happen to…
Prompt "engineering" is just writing prayers to forest faeries. Whilst BASIC/JavaScript/etc are all magic incantations to a child, a child will soon figure out there's underlaying logic, and learn the ability to reason…
If your "proof" can't port to Humans then it's not proof Learn to take a hint. I'm not going to argue this on human terms because you're playing a dumb um-akshually game. Computer reasoning systems can solve vastly more…
Humans provide increasingly wrong answers as questions get more complex too. Human this, Human that. LLMs aren't humans. "My model is crap but the human brain isn't very good at this either" is irrelevant when we have…
This is where the terminology becomes a bit annoying, but there is a key difference in the kinds of reasoning at work here. When you ask LLMs to provide a reasoning, the actual reasoning performed is linguistic; The LLM…
This is setting the bar way too high. No. If these things are claimed to be sources of truth, then the bar needs to be that high. It is precisely because people don't fact-check that the bar has to be so high.
All this under the auspices of "ethics", which as a reminder, is just an arbitrary set of rules which someone is trying to pass off as having a divine origin. They are arbitrary only in the sense that, sans a religion's…
Remember that database rights are a thing. One cannot hold copyright facts, but one can "copyright" a collection of facts like a search index or a map.
"Living History" is a well crafted written experience, not procedurally generated slop. The issue here is that LLMs can only act in-character if the world has already been built and written, if the prompts are so…
but you can tune your prompts so that 100% of the time they give you a valid result in the result You can't though, that's the issue. Illustrative here are tokens like "SolidGoldMagikarp", but this does happen to…
Prompt "engineering" is just writing prayers to forest faeries. Whilst BASIC/JavaScript/etc are all magic incantations to a child, a child will soon figure out there's underlaying logic, and learn the ability to reason…