It makes poor writing look superficially more considered. More readable, no, not when you realise.
That's pathetic.
No, it really doesn't read fine. None of this shit reads fine.
Yes, of course, that's literally the definition
They obviously want to be able to invade Taiwan, yes, nobody serious would assert that they're developing amphibious capacity for self defence. That's not the same thing as planning to invade in 2027, though. Militaries…
This really doesn't make it better.
I'm on my phone so maybe I missed something but I didn't even see that this was about exceptions to the rule? It seemed to be more about cases where the first sound couldn't be recovered orthographically. He special…
That's true, we don't want it to do that, we want it to kill these parasitic entities. Much like one doesn't swat a mosquito because one will truly miss the amount of blood she's taking.
LLMs self-evidently have no experience when not inferencing, seems like the most consequential difference to me. If we are next token predictors then we are next token predictors that are inferencing at every waking…
Huh! I'd always accepted the backronym without even thinking about it, but it makes so much more sense as arbitrary letters associated with sequences that are very easy to remember and distinguish than as a real weird…
That's the trick, isn't it, though? Rationally it's especially a problem if it happens all at once, but realistically if your bank has an awful quarter then you're at fault whereas if every bank has an awful quarter…
It's not tricking, though. The rules come from holy texts, they're perfect, if you find what seems like a loophole then it must obviously be intended. It's blasphemous, even, to think that you understand what god means…
I read it as "I'm very clever and sensible. I definitely don't believe in souls." Like so much other material produced by people who (I suspect deliberately) confuse religion with the subjective phenomenon of existence
It's not an ad hominem. In fact, it's perhaps the most good faith interpretation of your words possible. Ad hominem would be calling you stupid because you obviously know that you have a self and only your own stupidity…
Everyone involved in this including the police are civilians
I would suggest it says primarily that mimicking people's voices in meaningful ways is still far beyond LLMs and particularly small LLMs, but also more insurmountably that the prompt for Leavitt herself contains many…
And once the initial install of something was complete, you'd then be able to run it with no further ado :D
What on earth does defamation being a civil offense have to do with anything? It's a civil offense in the UK too, criminal defamation hasn't been a thing since 2010 and was barely a thing before then. If you want to…
Yeah. We know. That's why it's so fucking awful.
In fact, a certain amount of investment in frauds is acceptable and desirable; if you give £10m to 9 frauds who spunk it straight up the wall and to 1 true visionary who builds a unicorn, that's money well spent. Plus…
It's possible to mandate effective parental controls and then say "it's illegal to give your child access to facebook" and then just see what happens. You don't have to jump straight to making it technologically…
It is difficult not to dismiss this sort of proof out of hand, because every religion engages in it. Buddhism can probably (?) coexist with many deist religions, but few of them can coexist with each other.
Jail? Just for saying you're English?
You've put "helpless nematodes" in quotes despite the article literally not once saying that. It says: > Oyster mushrooms also happen to be one of the few carnivorous mushrooms – preying mercilessly on nematode worms.…
Marshall didn't research anything, he just made it up.
It makes poor writing look superficially more considered. More readable, no, not when you realise.
That's pathetic.
No, it really doesn't read fine. None of this shit reads fine.
Yes, of course, that's literally the definition
They obviously want to be able to invade Taiwan, yes, nobody serious would assert that they're developing amphibious capacity for self defence. That's not the same thing as planning to invade in 2027, though. Militaries…
This really doesn't make it better.
I'm on my phone so maybe I missed something but I didn't even see that this was about exceptions to the rule? It seemed to be more about cases where the first sound couldn't be recovered orthographically. He special…
That's true, we don't want it to do that, we want it to kill these parasitic entities. Much like one doesn't swat a mosquito because one will truly miss the amount of blood she's taking.
LLMs self-evidently have no experience when not inferencing, seems like the most consequential difference to me. If we are next token predictors then we are next token predictors that are inferencing at every waking…
Huh! I'd always accepted the backronym without even thinking about it, but it makes so much more sense as arbitrary letters associated with sequences that are very easy to remember and distinguish than as a real weird…
That's the trick, isn't it, though? Rationally it's especially a problem if it happens all at once, but realistically if your bank has an awful quarter then you're at fault whereas if every bank has an awful quarter…
It's not tricking, though. The rules come from holy texts, they're perfect, if you find what seems like a loophole then it must obviously be intended. It's blasphemous, even, to think that you understand what god means…
I read it as "I'm very clever and sensible. I definitely don't believe in souls." Like so much other material produced by people who (I suspect deliberately) confuse religion with the subjective phenomenon of existence
It's not an ad hominem. In fact, it's perhaps the most good faith interpretation of your words possible. Ad hominem would be calling you stupid because you obviously know that you have a self and only your own stupidity…
Everyone involved in this including the police are civilians
I would suggest it says primarily that mimicking people's voices in meaningful ways is still far beyond LLMs and particularly small LLMs, but also more insurmountably that the prompt for Leavitt herself contains many…
And once the initial install of something was complete, you'd then be able to run it with no further ado :D
What on earth does defamation being a civil offense have to do with anything? It's a civil offense in the UK too, criminal defamation hasn't been a thing since 2010 and was barely a thing before then. If you want to…
Yeah. We know. That's why it's so fucking awful.
In fact, a certain amount of investment in frauds is acceptable and desirable; if you give £10m to 9 frauds who spunk it straight up the wall and to 1 true visionary who builds a unicorn, that's money well spent. Plus…
It's possible to mandate effective parental controls and then say "it's illegal to give your child access to facebook" and then just see what happens. You don't have to jump straight to making it technologically…
It is difficult not to dismiss this sort of proof out of hand, because every religion engages in it. Buddhism can probably (?) coexist with many deist religions, but few of them can coexist with each other.
Jail? Just for saying you're English?
You've put "helpless nematodes" in quotes despite the article literally not once saying that. It says: > Oyster mushrooms also happen to be one of the few carnivorous mushrooms – preying mercilessly on nematode worms.…
Marshall didn't research anything, he just made it up.