Eh, agree to disagree. My use of the phrase might be easier to parse if you think about the "hard problem of consciousness" as opposed to the "easy problem of consciousness". Also, more remotely, the notion of NP-hard vs NP-easy in computational complexity. I guess we are arguing about semantics aren't we ?
I’m fairly certain that’s not a strict definition - LLMs also seem very heavily influencable via their context window inputs, though those are more limited and transient than the training set.
While LLMs don't simply "statistically predict the next token" (common over-simplification which bears no relation to what is actually going on), the output they produce does exhibit the same statistical distribution as their training data. That's how you get intelligible language, code that compiles, chains of thought that makes sense etc... The context input will steer the output towards a certain subset of the corpus (highly optimized C functions have slightly different distribution than throw-away Python scripts), but it can never direct the model fully out of distribution as those out of distribution vectors cannot be expressed within the model's embedding space.
she was a commodity - as talented as you could ask, more talented than many national acts, but not unique
Yes exactly, if music was solvable then the most skilled people would systematically outclass the least skilled ones which is obviously not the case.
it’s precisely because software engineering is hard (not difficult, but rigid - objective) that makes it a good fit for LLM agent execution
Yes i think we're actually in agreement here. I said "hard" (not difficult) as a reference to "hard problems", a term that comes from complexity theory but is now commonly used to describe problems which can't be reduced to an algorithm or evaluated objectively, and thus can't readily be "solved".
Squishy subjects like music and sociology are full of hard problems, while solid subjects like math and coding are full of easy problems. Now the change introduced by LLMs is that as long as a problem is "easy", it can no longer be so laborious as to be impossible. Every software problem is solvable, modulo the effort/computing power you can spend on it.
Your job as a software architect / engineer is actually to find the easiest workable solution(s).
You also get bonus point if your solution is average (standard, unsurprising etc...), which makes it particularly soluble in LLMs which, by definition, can only produce output that is within the distribution of their training set.
As for relative difficulty, the “soft” fields have a very sliding scale for that with a lot of allowance given to newbies that isn’t accepted “at the highest levels”
That's not where i would put the difference. If you take a field like music, the problem is that it can't "just work". A nostalgic song may move the masses today but you can't say "okay we've solved nostalgia let's get to serenity next". Soon enough you'll need a new nostalgic song and by definition it will be out of distribution. You can't find it in a high dimensional representation of past music, and, well, you can't train on future data, so there is no way an LLM finds it and recognizes it for what it is.
with a high bar of standards required before publication and release, LLMs are a powerful tool that can accelerate many creative processes
I still believe they'll never amount to much regarding artistic processes, and not just for the reasons i already mentioned. To make something good you need to sit with it and walk with it and spend some time in it doing all the tedious little tasks until it really feels like home and you can express yourself in it. You can't achieve that if a machine speedruns all the little tasks for you.
You're entirely right. This won't replicate to other fields like writing and creative arts in general, but software engineering is just not that hard and can basically be brute forced with a good harness.
It's a done deal and there is no world where people will write professional code by hand. I like it cause it really separates coding (the job) from coding (the art form). People will code by hand for aesthetic reasons just like people learn the violin instead of using a synth and we'll have a generation of lovingly crafted stuff. But boring software will be entirely automated, if not generated on the fly based on immediate needs.
That's cool but you're describing the models from 2 years ago and also not considering harnesses, which account for most of the progress of the last year or so.
The whole thing is predicated upon him training her to sit still for hours on end on stream "like a prop", which she barely ever does. Litterally you just have to watch the VODs , you'd be lucky to find more than 10 minutes of her on-screen on most streams. The whole scenario is pure brainrot and only believable if you don't look critically at the evidence. So this guy used a shock collar to train a large dog to sit still for hours on end but there was only one (1) transgression ever recorded and she never sits still anyway. How do you square that up ?
You're grasping at a few seconds of video (out of the 6+ hours he produces daily year in year out), edited out of context by people with a very specific agenda, and walls of concern-trolling prose that tugs at your emotional strings for some reason. It's trivially easy to make up that kind of story and astro-turf it to death, with hundreds of inactive accounts coincidentally posting their first comment in the same week, which happens to be a copy-pasted list of pre-digested arguments and fact-free appeals to outrage. You're getting QAnon'd in the worst way.
people engaged enough to believe a wall of text on Reddit or a video compilation on YouTube, but not engaged enough to actually watch his channel to check anything
Same, not that I hate them specifically but I have a skill to completely ignore artists I don't care about. Bunch of my friends were big fans but me I can't even tell them apart from Linkin park. Like, who sang "numb" ?
I discovered him when they tried to pretend he was zapping his dog on stream. It was an interesting sequence because apparently they targeted people engaged enough to believe a wall of text on Reddit or a video compilation on YouTube, but not engaged enough to actually watch his channel to check anything.
Obviously they found a large audience, but hey Hasan gained a follower I guess.
The book burning thing is just a public relations campaign by publishers because they are getting ready for another billion dollar lawsuit and they want the public's approval.
There is no shortage of books we print like 10 billions of them every year, and the publishers and booksellers burn a lot more books themselves than AI labs ever will.
I swear to God this is terrifying to me. No wonder the US is a creepy place. And you've got people all over this thread defending it cause their parents did it to them. "They were right to leash me I was a runner" Jesus fucking Christ it's a carbon copy of every thread on corporal punishment ever.
I'm in the process of building a device that lets you plug a landline telephone to a standard sound system. It's just so I can use it on stage, I wanna pick up the phone and sing with that vintage crackling voice.
Sadly, it is not "made" yet because I suck at electronics but I've got all the components I need and some time on my hands.
It was fashionable at a time to avoid ifs and other imperative structures, but I tend to like them. Functional is nice and all but I like my code to be smart in the way it works, not in the way it's written. Nested ifs are readable, collapsible, and easy to make sense of at a glance, there's often nothing wrong with using them.
I'm playing star trucker right now so I'd be golden. Just one year of hauling cargo, customizing my rig and doing the occasional EVA to salvage expensive jetsam. Where do I sign?
Je crois que ce que tu décris ce sont les clichés d'Hollywood. Y'a rien dans la bible qui dit qu'un démon ne fait que le mal, en fait les démons et l'enfer sont presque totalement absents des livres. Pareil pour les anges, la vision du chérubin gentil qui fait le bien c'est très très moderne et ça ne vient pas des livres.
Sinon oui, les textes sont assez clair, les gens peuvent changer, et se repentir de leurs pêchés. Le pardon de Dieu est infini donc il reconnait lui même la possibilité du changement.
Le problème c'est que cette grille de lecture est bonne pour disséquer les arcs d'un manga mais pas pour parler d'un recueil religieux de l'âge du fer.
La fixation sur la cohérence et la factualité sont des caractéristiques de l'esprit moderne. Ca n'aurait eu aucun sens ni aucune importance pour un intellectuel de l'époque, c'était considéré comme des détails sans importance. Ce qui était important c'était l'utilité à la fois collective (de bons enseignements moraux) et personnelle (un système mystique fonctionnel).
Sur ces points la bible a une très bonne note car elle est basée sur les fondations philosophiques solides du néo-platonisme, et sur la technologie mystique des anciens israélites. On peut pas trop faire mieux pour l'époque.
It's a shame cause the idea of a cozy, human-centered place on the modern internet is a sweet proposition in itself. Not everything needs to be a war, and you always have the option of letting go of things you can't control.
Eh, agree to disagree. My use of the phrase might be easier to parse if you think about the "hard problem of consciousness" as opposed to the "easy problem of consciousness". Also, more remotely, the notion of NP-hard vs NP-easy in computational complexity. I guess we are arguing about semantics aren't we ?
While LLMs don't simply "statistically predict the next token" (common over-simplification which bears no relation to what is actually going on), the output they produce does exhibit the same statistical distribution as their training data. That's how you get intelligible language, code that compiles, chains of thought that makes sense etc... The context input will steer the output towards a certain subset of the corpus (highly optimized C functions have slightly different distribution than throw-away Python scripts), but it can never direct the model fully out of distribution as those out of distribution vectors cannot be expressed within the model's embedding space.
Yes exactly, if music was solvable then the most skilled people would systematically outclass the least skilled ones which is obviously not the case.
Yes i think we're actually in agreement here. I said "hard" (not difficult) as a reference to "hard problems", a term that comes from complexity theory but is now commonly used to describe problems which can't be reduced to an algorithm or evaluated objectively, and thus can't readily be "solved".
Squishy subjects like music and sociology are full of hard problems, while solid subjects like math and coding are full of easy problems. Now the change introduced by LLMs is that as long as a problem is "easy", it can no longer be so laborious as to be impossible. Every software problem is solvable, modulo the effort/computing power you can spend on it.
You also get bonus point if your solution is average (standard, unsurprising etc...), which makes it particularly soluble in LLMs which, by definition, can only produce output that is within the distribution of their training set.
That's not where i would put the difference. If you take a field like music, the problem is that it can't "just work". A nostalgic song may move the masses today but you can't say "okay we've solved nostalgia let's get to serenity next". Soon enough you'll need a new nostalgic song and by definition it will be out of distribution. You can't find it in a high dimensional representation of past music, and, well, you can't train on future data, so there is no way an LLM finds it and recognizes it for what it is.
I still believe they'll never amount to much regarding artistic processes, and not just for the reasons i already mentioned. To make something good you need to sit with it and walk with it and spend some time in it doing all the tedious little tasks until it really feels like home and you can express yourself in it. You can't achieve that if a machine speedruns all the little tasks for you.
You're entirely right. This won't replicate to other fields like writing and creative arts in general, but software engineering is just not that hard and can basically be brute forced with a good harness.
It's a done deal and there is no world where people will write professional code by hand. I like it cause it really separates coding (the job) from coding (the art form). People will code by hand for aesthetic reasons just like people learn the violin instead of using a synth and we'll have a generation of lovingly crafted stuff. But boring software will be entirely automated, if not generated on the fly based on immediate needs.
That's cool but you're describing the models from 2 years ago and also not considering harnesses, which account for most of the progress of the last year or so.
The whole thing is predicated upon him training her to sit still for hours on end on stream "like a prop", which she barely ever does. Litterally you just have to watch the VODs , you'd be lucky to find more than 10 minutes of her on-screen on most streams. The whole scenario is pure brainrot and only believable if you don't look critically at the evidence. So this guy used a shock collar to train a large dog to sit still for hours on end but there was only one (1) transgression ever recorded and she never sits still anyway. How do you square that up ?
You're grasping at a few seconds of video (out of the 6+ hours he produces daily year in year out), edited out of context by people with a very specific agenda, and walls of concern-trolling prose that tugs at your emotional strings for some reason. It's trivially easy to make up that kind of story and astro-turf it to death, with hundreds of inactive accounts coincidentally posting their first comment in the same week, which happens to be a copy-pasted list of pre-digested arguments and fact-free appeals to outrage. You're getting QAnon'd in the worst way.
Hey it's cool man, i sure expected to see one of you people in the replies.
Same, not that I hate them specifically but I have a skill to completely ignore artists I don't care about. Bunch of my friends were big fans but me I can't even tell them apart from Linkin park. Like, who sang "numb" ?
I discovered him when they tried to pretend he was zapping his dog on stream. It was an interesting sequence because apparently they targeted people engaged enough to believe a wall of text on Reddit or a video compilation on YouTube, but not engaged enough to actually watch his channel to check anything.
Obviously they found a large audience, but hey Hasan gained a follower I guess.
Probably grants, and even when exercised they almost certainly don't come with voting rights.
The book burning thing is just a public relations campaign by publishers because they are getting ready for another billion dollar lawsuit and they want the public's approval.
There is no shortage of books we print like 10 billions of them every year, and the publishers and booksellers burn a lot more books themselves than AI labs ever will.
Everyone loves having written but everybody hates writing ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Chrome OS existed long before this API, it has a Linux base to handle this kind of thing.
I swear to God this is terrifying to me. No wonder the US is a creepy place. And you've got people all over this thread defending it cause their parents did it to them. "They were right to leash me I was a runner" Jesus fucking Christ it's a carbon copy of every thread on corporal punishment ever.
I'm in the process of building a device that lets you plug a landline telephone to a standard sound system. It's just so I can use it on stage, I wanna pick up the phone and sing with that vintage crackling voice.
Sadly, it is not "made" yet because I suck at electronics but I've got all the components I need and some time on my hands.
It was fashionable at a time to avoid ifs and other imperative structures, but I tend to like them. Functional is nice and all but I like my code to be smart in the way it works, not in the way it's written. Nested ifs are readable, collapsible, and easy to make sense of at a glance, there's often nothing wrong with using them.
I'm playing star trucker right now so I'd be golden. Just one year of hauling cargo, customizing my rig and doing the occasional EVA to salvage expensive jetsam. Where do I sign?
Je crois que ce que tu décris ce sont les clichés d'Hollywood. Y'a rien dans la bible qui dit qu'un démon ne fait que le mal, en fait les démons et l'enfer sont presque totalement absents des livres. Pareil pour les anges, la vision du chérubin gentil qui fait le bien c'est très très moderne et ça ne vient pas des livres.
Sinon oui, les textes sont assez clair, les gens peuvent changer, et se repentir de leurs pêchés. Le pardon de Dieu est infini donc il reconnait lui même la possibilité du changement.
Le problème c'est que cette grille de lecture est bonne pour disséquer les arcs d'un manga mais pas pour parler d'un recueil religieux de l'âge du fer.
La fixation sur la cohérence et la factualité sont des caractéristiques de l'esprit moderne. Ca n'aurait eu aucun sens ni aucune importance pour un intellectuel de l'époque, c'était considéré comme des détails sans importance. Ce qui était important c'était l'utilité à la fois collective (de bons enseignements moraux) et personnelle (un système mystique fonctionnel).
Sur ces points la bible a une très bonne note car elle est basée sur les fondations philosophiques solides du néo-platonisme, et sur la technologie mystique des anciens israélites. On peut pas trop faire mieux pour l'époque.
It's a shame cause the idea of a cozy, human-centered place on the modern internet is a sweet proposition in itself. Not everything needs to be a war, and you always have the option of letting go of things you can't control.