self

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

holy fuck, I can’t stop picturing it

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

it may be possible to reconfigure lemmy’s markdown renderer to shunt anything (within reason) between $s to mathjax; I wouldn’t mind looking into that once we restart development on Philthy.

in the meantime, as an inadequate compromise, you can enable mathjax on gibberish.awful.systems blogs and get better rendering for a long-form math-heavy article there. the unfortunate trade-off is you’ll lose the ability to upload images and they’ll have to be PRed into the frontend repo if you want them local (yes, that’s really the recommended way to do it in bare WriteFreely, unless you’re on their paid flagship instance where they spun up a private imgur clone to handle it).

if there’s interest and PRing images in (or using an upload service elsewhere) isn’t doing it, we can look into doing a basic authenticated upload into object storage kind of service. (or maybe there’s a way to hack pict-rs into doing it? I don’t like pict-rs, but it is our image cache)

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

I’d say we should start calling this computer science affinity fraud shit “O(0) algorithms”, but knowing the space it’ll be like 2 months before crypto twitter starts using it ironically and maybe 6 months if we’re lucky before it shows up in a whitepaper cause the affinity grifters realized it’d make mediocre engineers buy more fraudcoins

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago (11 children)

I will find someone who I consider better than me in relevant ways, and have them provide the genetic material. I think that it would be immoral not to, and that it is impossible not to think this way after thinking seriously about it.

we’re definitely not a cult, I don’t know why anyone would think that

Consider it from your child’s perspective. There are many people who they could be born to. Who would they pick? Do you have any right to deny them the father they would choose? It would be like kidnapping a child – an unutterably selfish act. You have a duty to your children – you must act in their best interest, not yours.

I just don’t understand how so many TESCREAL thoughts and ideas fit this broken fucking pattern. “have you thought about ? but have you really thought about it? you must not have cause if you did you would agree it was !”

and you really can tell you’re dealing with a cult when you start from the pretense that a child that doesn’t exist yet has a perspective — these fucking weirdos will have heaven and hell by any means, no matter how much math and statistics they have to abuse past the breaking point to do it.

and just like with any religious fundamentalist, the child doesn’t have any autonomy. how could they, if all their behavior has already been simulated to perfection? there’s no room for an imperfect child’s happiness; for familial bonding; for normal human shit. all that must be cope, cause it doesn’t fit into a broken TESCREAL worldview.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

my strong impression is that surveillance advertising has been an unmitigated disaster for the ability to actually sell products in any kind of sensible way — see also the success of influencer marketing, under the (utterly false) pretense that it’s less targeted and more authentic than the rest of the shit we’re used to

but marketing is an industry run by utterly incompetent morally bankrupt fuckheads, so my impression is also that none of them particularly know or care that the majority of what they’re doing doesn’t work; there’s power in surveillance and they like that feeling, so the data remains extremely valuable on the market

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

you’re right, I’m giving them way too much credit — the full thought is almost definitely “There is no greater story than people’s relentless and dogged endeavor to overcome repressive regimes and replace them with their own repressive regimes, but this time with heroin and sex tourism”

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

what if we made the large language model larger? it’s weird nobody has attempted this

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

also this is all horseshit so I know they haven’t thought this far ahead, but pushing a bit on the oracle problem, how do they think they solved these fundamental issues in their proposed design?

  • if verifying answers are correct is up to the miners, how do they prevent the miners from just generating any old bullshit using a much less expensive method than an LLM (a Markov chain say, or even just random characters or an empty string if nobody’s checking) and pocketing the tokens?
  • if verification is up to the requester, why would you ever mark an answer as correct? if you’re forced to pick one correct answer that gets your tokens, what’s stopping you from spinning up an adversarial miner that produces random answers and marking those as correct, ensuring you keep both your tokens and the other miners’ answers?
  • if answers are verified centrally… there’s no need for the miners or their models, just use whatever that central source of truth is.

and of course this is avoiding the elephant in the room: LLMs have no concept of truth, they just extrude plausible bullshit into a statistically likely shape. there’s no source of truth that can reliably distinguish bad LLM responses from good ones, and if you had one you’d probably be better off just using it instead of an LLM.

edit cause for some reason my brain can’t stop it with this fractally wrong shit: finally, if their plan is to just evenly distribute tokens across miners and return all answers: congrats on the “decentralized” network of /dev/urandom to string converters you weird fucks

another edit: I read the fucking spec and somehow it’s even stupider than any of the above. you can trivially just spend tokens to buy a majority of the validator slots for a subnet (which I guess in normal cultist lingo would be a subchain) and use that to kick out everyone else’s miners:

Only the top 64 validators, when ranked by their stake amount in any particular subnet, are considered to have a validator permit. Only these top 64 subnet validators with permits are considered active in the subnet.

a third edit, please help, my brain is melting: what does a non-adversarial validator even look like in this architecture? we can’t fucking verify LLM outputs like I said so… is this just multiple computers doing RAG and pretending that’s a good idea? is the idea that you run some kind of unbounded training algorithm and we also live in a universe where model overfitting doesn’t exist? help I am melting

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (8 children)

If you remember early bitcoin, some people would say it’s money, some people would say it’s gold. Some people would say it’s this blockchain … The way that I look at Bittensor is as the World Wide Web of AI.

it’s really rude of you to find and quote a paragraph designed to force me to take four shots in rapid succession in my ongoing crypto/AI drinking game!

How does Bittensor work? “When you have a question, you send it out to the network. Miners whose models are suited to answer your question will process it and send back a proposed answer.” The “miners” are rewarded with TAO tokens.

“what do you mean oracle problem? our new thing’s nothing but oracles, we just have to figure out a way to know they’re telling the truth!”

Bittensor is enormously proud to be decentralized, because that’s a concept that totally makes sense with AI models, right? “There is no greater story than people’s relentless and dogged endeavor to overcome repressive regimes,” starts Bittensor’s introduction page.

meme stock cults and crypto scams both should maybe consider keeping pseudo-leftist jargon out of their fucking mouths

e: also, Bittensor? really?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago

fucking imagine coming back to a place you’re not welcome with this “eeehhh you’re being a bit aggressive tbh” shit

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I think your response is a bit aggressive TBH.

nah, an aggressive response is me telling you to fuck yourself as I ban you for a second(!) time for making these exact terrible fucking posts

I’ve saved many hours of work with it, in languages I don’t really even know.

maybe by next ban you’ll figure out why your PRs keep getting closed

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

congrats on asking jeeves

is it bad to be bad at a system designed for exploitation? maybe your grandma had a point

view more: ‹ prev next ›