• 0 Posts
  • 173 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle

  • It’s not damn near anything. There’s loads of stuff that computers can do much more quickly and more accurately without it just by virtue of computers already being fast and effective at maths and obeying logic. With or without the transformer architecture, a neural network is never going to be as fast or reliable at, for example, summing a collection of numbers as just adding them would be, and loads of real-world tasks are like this, hence why we’ve built billions of computers even before the transformer architecture was invented.

    Also, in particular, I didn’t say that the transformer architecture wasn’t useful for things that aren’t LLMs, I said that most of the work done specifically to improve LLMs has no applications outside LLMs, so the next big leap towards making computers intelligent isn’t helped more by working on LLMs than it would be by working on any other kind of AI.


  • It’s actually just a lot of pretty simple maths from decades ago, but it’s a lot of it. The big changes in those decades have been the feasibility of doing enough of that simple maths to achieve anything useful, and domain-specific network architecture stuff that’s rarely transferable, e.g. LLMs are possible because of the invention of the transformer architecture in 2017, and that’s also turned out to be useful for a few things like image generation and protein folding simulation, but not for all neural network based techniques, and then most of the things that have made successive LLMs better haven’t also been useful for the few other transformer-architecture-based neural networks. Most not-LLM AI isn’t going to be meaningfully easier to create than it would have been had the world got bored after GPT-2 and we’d only focussed on doing image and video generation.


  • It’s a fairly common sentiment that ‘good billionaires’ like Newell will demonstrate that seeking profit by making things people want to buy is more profitable than ruining things people were already buying so margins are higher, thereby making the bad billionaires want to copy them, and then capitalism will start working for the common people, and that therefore seizing the means of production is unnecessary as long as they praise gaben. Pointing out that he’s still accumulating the value of other people’s labour as quickly as he can and he’s just less short-sighted about it, rather than aiming to do good, can be helpful.



  • Fun fact: if you’re self employed in the UK, you’ve been able to do your taxes online via a simple (ish) form on the HMRC website, but they’re in the process of phasing it out in favour of third-party proprietary software, so some people aren’t allowed to use the free web form anymore, and within two or three years, it’ll become totally unavailable. Everyone always loves it when the government finds things that Americans complain about and copies it here so we get to complain about it, too.


  • Lots of shops have gone out of business because, by having a premises, their operating expenses were more than an online retailer, so places like Amazon could undercut them, and their customers were willing to wait for delivery to save some money. It doesn’t take that many customers leaving before you’ve got to put up prices to cover your overheads, and that just makes more customers leave, and after a couple of decades of online retail being common, you’re left with far fewer physical shops.












  • You’ve probably created something that would be considered a DRM circumvention device under the DMCA, so possessing it would be illegal unless it’s covered by one of the exceptions. If you think it might be, then you’re probably in a legal grey area as there isn’t case law settling whether the exceptions override the parts about DRM circumvention, but it’s fairly widely accepted that they probably do - DRM-era console emulators like Dolphin rely on it being legal to bypass the games’ DRM in order to interoperate with other computer systems, and no one’s been brave enough to sue them for that interpretation yet.

    If it is illegal, the most likely outcome is just that someone does a DMCA takedown request and GitHub would take it down and that would be the end of that, which is pretty much the same thing as would likely happen if anyone didn’t like it but it was legal, as it’s easy to submit takedown requests, but hard to appeal them if they’re unjustified.