Apple immersive video has been the killer app for me, but their release schedule is 5 minutes every other month. They really need to double down on the media creation imho
Isn't that true only if the batches are different? If you run exactly the same batch, you're back to a deterministic result.
If I had a black box api, just because you don't know how it's calculated doesn't mean that it's non-deterministic. It's the underlaying algorithm that determines that and a LLM is deterministic.
Providers never run same batches because they mix requests between different clients, otherwise GPUs are gonna be severely underutilized.
It’s inherently non deterministic because it reflects the reality of having different requests coming to the servers at the same time.
And I don’t believe there are any realistic workarounds if you want to keep costs reasonable.
Edit: there might be workarounds if matmul algorithms will give stronger guarantees then they are today (invariance on rows/columns swap). Not an expert to say how feasible it is, especially in quantized scenario.
https://www.medievia.com has a concept of kingdoms and clans will battle to gain control over territory for the kingdoms, so there's a bit of a persistence due to the ebb and flow of clan membership and how they can hold back the other clans.
Just to be clear, I have no affiliation with levels.fyi, so I have no idea why they decided to post on Reddit rather than their blog. I just thought it was a interesting post to share.
Thanks for posting this—it's super interesting! I was just curious why the author of the Reddit post didn't publish it on their own blog, since it's definitely worth preserving there.
Yes. Microvms are stripped down to the basic hardware needed (AWS' Firecracker for example), so they 'boot' really fast, in the tenths of seconds for my containers, but you do have the extra resource overhead of running a second kernel and the performance reduction of the VM context switches. That said, it's minor enough that I feel the security tradeoff is well worth it.
Why go through the stress and performative dance of a poly when there's zero upside? He admitted to being a friend and (according to the article) that's alone enough to demote and block advancement.
Polys are also subjective. They keep asking the same questions over and over again until there's some indication they can point to and say you're lying. It might be a sneeze, cough, or a deep breath at the wrong time. It's also generally a multi hour to multi day ordeal. I wouldn't bother if I was them.
Until we get a LLM that actually "thinks", it's just a tool like photoshop. Photoshop isn't racist if someone uses it to create racist material, so a LLM wouldn't be racist either.
I saw (on HN, actually) an academic definition for prejudice, discrimination, and racism that stuck with me. I might be butchering this a bit, but prejudice is basically thinking another group is less than purely because of their race. Discrimination is acting on that belief. Racism is discrimination based on race, particularly when the person discriminated against is a minority/less powerful person.
LLMs don't think, and also have no race. So I have a hard time saying they can racist, per se. But they can absolutely produce racist and discriminatory material. Especially if their training corpus contains racist and discriminatory material (which it absolutely does.)
I do think it's important to distinguish between photoshop, which is largely built from feature implementation ("The paint bucket behaves like this", etc.), and LLMs which are predictive engines that try to predict the right set of words to say based on their understanding of human media. The input is not some thoughtful set of PMs and engineers, it's "read all this, figure out the patterns". If "all this" contains racist material, the LLM will sometimes repeat it.
There's a huge difference between "We don't want copyrights" and "We're just going to have no one enforcing laws for a random period of time and it's unknown if there will be historic enforcement activities if/when that changes"
I'm confused about this example, isn't the count of grains of sand equal to the count of observable universes so it'd be a single grain of sand per universe?
The "about" does a lot of heavy lifting in this example. Dividing 10,000,000_10 by the number of grains that fit into one universe doesn't change it much. The 10,000,000 would get smaller somewhere in the deep depths of the decimal fraction.
So the purpose of the judiciary branch is to interpret the laws. If a judge rules that the government is violating the law, you want the government to continue to be allowed to violate the law until the legislature convenes a hearing and rules and then what? The judiciary branch was able to rule on punishment for violating the rules, fines and jail time and what not. You would push all that to the legislature as well? Or would the legislature run a hearing and then ask the judiciary branch to pick the punishment and then have the legislature apply it?
I just don't understand how you expect this to work unless the point is to make the judiciary branch entirely pointless (for government level check and balances).
This is the same Supreme Court that granted the president immunity from any and all criminal charges as long they were made under the umbrella of the presidency. None of this is normal, and these are radical interpretations of the law explicitly designed to grant the president king like powers and reform the government into an authoritarian regime.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity_in_the_Unit...
Sovereign Immunity is an idea that has a long precedence.
The Supreme Court was arguing that bad behaviour by the President is resolved through impeachment, and once they are out of office they are subject to criminal charges.
Almost any idea has long precedence, but the confluence of recent rulings, taken in its aggregate, provides a pretty well defined toolkit for a major departure from the normative state into the prerogative state. No amount of intellectual Zamboni reasoning can change the fact that it’s obvious to any rational observer that the U.S. is speed running an authoritarian takeover. Naturally some will support these changes and others will oppose them, but it’s as objectively verifiable as climate change; albeit, with the same chorus of denialism.
reply