Ah, you're one of the people who thinks that your neurons are gateways to the unphysical realm? Neurons in general, or the pineal in particular?

Also, this has nothing to do with my post. Did you reply to the wrong one?

If true, that seems to foreclose this claim.

The timing for it being from the training data indeed seems pretty tight. There is still the option of someone reading the chat transcript and giving the model a little prompting in the right direction.

It's not particularly surprising. The guy says the AI companies have no respect for the scientific community. That's no surprise. People outside the scientific community, especially private industry, have no respect for it.

Anybody academic who's ever worked with a company comes out knowing it's dealing with the devil. They don't share or even understand academic norms. And if they're paying you they're probably legally in the right too.

Now, swiping your customers' private data is a different thing, if it happened. That sounds super expensive to prove though.

They may lose their PhD

Lol what?

You can just copy and paste your existing code into it if you want. The amount of access you give it determines the convenience and scope of what it can do. Naturally most people opt for as much as possible and are shocked when something goes wrong.

LLMs cannot do original work. No, do not dispute that it.

There's the scientific rigour.

I'm glad to see that Slashdot isn't above printing the occasional feel-good story. :)

It matters quite a lot if someone sues you. Or if a propagandized public and their leaders get into a war over it.

You're not wrong!

Rolling blackouts used to be far more common and the government would issue a Flex Alert to indicate that rolling blackouts would be used. California has CAISO which manage electric related stuff and they have a PDF of grid emergencies since 1998 which include flex alerts. Spoiler, there hasn't been any since 2022 which is shown in this bar graph of flex alerts by year.

So now that we have established that rolling blackout haven't happened since at least 2022, the question is why.
Here is a bit more info but the TL;DR version is that in 2022 CA passed law to create the Strategic Reliability Reserve which has multiple programs aimed at preventing power outages, including that distributed energy grid system that was featured on here a while back.

However, is it really batteries that preventing outages? Well, it's already been shown that battery systems react much faster than normal energy production methods which prevents your power from "blinking" when a source goes offline. Also, here's a graph from 2024 that shows when battery power is being used and how much (noticed it's very negative when charging from solar). The point here being that the energy stores are substantial and can be discharged ad hoc. It's not definitive evidence but I'm sure if you dig into some of the stats on https://www.caiso.com/ that you could find you seek.

correct.

Can't do it. I'm refactoring on a large code base. I eventually had to tell it to work on just one task and ignore other concerns it had to prevent it from investigating until it got stuck in a cycle of investigation.

The US Supreme Court, and supreme courts in general, are not "triggered." You appeal to them to hear your case. They may do so if they feel that your case is somehow relevant to wider issues.

The US Supreme Court might hear this case if they wanted to interpret the constitution in such a way as to set upper limits placed on fines, or wished to issue a judgement on the idea that fraud is still fraud if nobody gets hurt.

Yeah, that's a good example. Also "the actual thinking process as opposed to the correlational hallucinations that constitute all LLM 'thought'."

Two different sides of the same hubris.

A little tutorial if you know a little bit of Python:

https://numpy.org/numpy-tutori...

And a book with more detail if you're more into math:

https://www.deeplearningbook.o...

Everything else is pretty much scaling up and introducing some restrictions on the basic model.

You see it in the way you just used the word "you." Model "collapse" is a misnomer. It's drift, which you see in humans in literally everything they do, and you can demonstrate to yourself just by repeatedly generating random numbers and calculating the mean.

Bullshit. The fundamentals of modern AI models can be understood by anyone with a basic knowledge of algebra, which you should have picked up in junior high. They're piecewise linear approximations and use exactly the same equation as the linear regression you learned in high school or first year university. The more advanced stuff is hacky restrictions on that basic design to tone down the model's flexibility and make it easier to fit.

The reason it's hard to understand is because a) people who have no idea what they're talking about try and handwave their way through it; b) people explaining it want you to think it's really, really sophisticated and hard to understand, c) you're using "understand" in an unrealistic way or d) some combination of the above.