All the evolution in AI right now is just trying different model designs and/or data. It’s not one model that is being continuous refined or modified. Each iteration is just a new set of static weights/numbers that defines it’s calculations.
If the models were changing/updating through experience maybe what you’re writing would make sense, but that’s not the state of AI/ML development.
Yeah, not everything in science is super cool, but it is valuable to show why testing things out matters. Although it’s not like the scientific community has been great about doing peer reviews anyways.
That’s why I did “watching paint dry” as an actual science fair experiment. Tried putting paint in different environments to see how conditions actually effected the speed in which it dried.
Requires experimentation to backup a hypothesis with empirical data. Yeah it sounds boring, but had some fun with it regarding the different “environments” (like under heat lamp, with a fan, etc.)
Yeah another way to interpret it is “oh damn were doing something wrong and need better leadership”.
Not saying that’s actually the case, but would better align with the graphic.
It can emulate the switch, and I’ve tried it out with pretty good success, but not sure if there are any tradeoffs.
This approach has been around for a while and there are a number of applications/systems that were using the approach. The thing is that it’s not a different model, it’s just a different use case.
Its the same way OpenAI handle math, they recognize it’s asking for a math solution and actually have it produce a python solution and run it. You can’t integrate it into the model because they’re engineering solutions to make up for the models limitations.
Yeah, I was interested in the idea cause I have a saturn which is a bit beaten up, but if I can’t play the disc’s I have why would I bother.
Absolutely, I feel like my lucky cards hit every third shot, but the wheel feels more like 1/8.
Yeah I was really disappointed when I heard it was a cloud solution. I think it’s due to complexity of python runtime environments, but I doubt msoft minds the opportunity to take more control.
My biggest issue with it is that it runs everything in the cloud. So you’re shipping your data to Microsoft and have latency to run anything. Seems insecure and added complexity to get a bit more out of excel.
Am I an idiot or isn’t the “pip vs conda vs poetry” line talking about package management?
I mean I can list a lot of things AI (and I’ll limit it to Transformers, the advancement that drives LLMs) has enabled:
AI isn’t a scam, but it’s being oversold and it’s limitations are being purposefully hidden. That being said, it is changing how things are done and that’s not going to stop. We’re still seeing impacts from CNNs, one of the major AI/ML breakthroughs from over a decade ago, make impacts.
What was so obvious in that instance was the board members trying to push him out were calling out the lack of openness OpenAI was trending towards. They were literally calling him out for not upholding the vision of why the company was founded.
All the engineers clearly saw their payday slipping away and revolted for that reason. Can’t say I blame them, but it was a scenario where the board was actually doing the right thing and everyone turned on them for profit.
Originally all their work was supposed to be published and shared with the world, hence the “open” in OpenAI. However somewhere along the way they made a for-profit break off of the original company and started pulling everything in that direction.
Exactly what I came to comment on. Got a TV that’s half way off the wall and a ps5 hiding on the stairs just ready to take someone out.
This is what I was going to say.
That’s actually why I went with the Xbox this cycle. I got a series x for the large TV and a $200 (on sale) series S for the smaller one (although we usually just use a computer monitor and play side by side on the couch).
Yeah, the person above you seems to be ignoring the fact that them breaching their air space for the first time is an escalation, not to mention China has generally been escalating it’s rhetoric recently.
It could be argued that China is feeling pressured to escalate (due to external events or US escalating trade/policy stances), but threatening a missile system is more signaling “keep this up and we’ll respond”.
I also hate how this blames the candidate and not the voting populace. Kamala may not even win as it is, but would almost certainly loose if taking a strong stance on Gaza. Blame the American people and stop playing this whataboutism game.
All that aside, Kamala is the fastest way to ending the genocide. It may not be her current platform, but she’s the best shot at getting the US to change its stance.
Why be the bad guy when you can just enable them.