Comment Re:Fundamental physics has never been more dead (Score 1) 4
Yeah, what has a better understanding of particle physics ever done for US, huh???
_
Yeah, what has a better understanding of particle physics ever done for US, huh???
_
It's no surprise that most Slashdotters have lost their sense of wonder, as they've forgotten what it was like to be children.
Despite DST existing, I clearly remember waiting for the bus in the dark for part of the year.
DST doesn't do what it's supposed to do, and it kills people. It's weird to celebrate that.
if this were true it would not be possible for the system to read the watermark.
You confuse "invisible to humans" with "invisible to statistical analysis". Humans can't, for example, see the difference between metameric colours. Statistical analysis can. Humans can't see minor drift at scales where Brownian motion dominates. Statistical analysis can. Humans can't see the difference between background disease rates and new rising threats. Statistical analysis can. On and on. Statistical analysis is a far more powerful tool than human perceptual abilities.
this is also a lie. Identical thoughts must be expressed identically, otherwise they are, in fact, *different* thoughts.
I literally gave an example above. If you saw "picked a mango", "selected and picked a mango", "from within the tree, picked a mango", you would never think there was anything going on in the choice, and it isn't going to change the story one iota.
It's a regulation forced on them by the EU's AI Act, which neither companies nor users want.
The target audience for this particular rule of the AI Act isn't the producers or users of AI. It is the consumers of content that might be AI generated.
And frankly, letting people know if they see AI content or not is a fair thing to ask.
And honestly, "not measuring how much a human contributed" is IMHO a massive flaw in general
Fun fact: The EU AI Act considers this. It makes a difference between "AI generated" and "AI modified".
But it's hard to put this into the type of watermarking they are using. Because if you generate a text and then change a few things here and there what you are doing is degrading the watermark. But since the watermark is probabilistic, it's hard to tell if it was a weak watermark from the start or if it was degraded.
("It actually makes RAM needs worse" -> "MoEs actually make RAM needs worse")
It actually makes RAM needs worse than a dense model, for a given quality.
That said, inference techniques like FreeToken are improving MoE swapping performance, so it's not as bad as it once was. Honestly, I would not be at all surprised if we start doing training in a swap-aware manner, where expert cache misses count as loss and models can queue experts to start loading before they're needed. Could even train in two tiers of loading - RAM and disk. Wouldn't that be great? Could run multi-terabyte models on consumer hardware. Training would tend to tend to concentrate key logic and reasoning on small number of very active experts, mixed reasoning/knowledge on less common experts that are usually kept in RAM, and rarer knowledge on experts that usually remain on-disk until needed.
There are well known, reputable abliterators on HuggingFace.
Also, censorship usually (not always) is something you care about for chats, not agentic work.
A
It's big, but not good for its size. They're using tricks to pretend that they're better than they are. For example, compare the numbers that they list for the competion on DeepSWE up against the actual DeepSWE scores.
Not cool, Mistral.
Artificial Analysis is overrated, but yes, Mistral is playing fast and loose with their claims.
With permanent DST we won't get the stories twice a year.
It takes one hell of a toll to try to do verbal exams 1:1 on students to evaluate them.
Nobody said "verbal exams 1:1".
The only thing that is required is that they be separated from their computers and their phones.
Is there any language in the Terms of Service / Terms of Use that declare that their service is a mandatory reporter?
I guarantee you that they gave themselves the right to review your input for any purpose and inform law enforcement if they feel the need. I haven't read the agreement, but I'd still bet money.
If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law. -- Roy Santoro