If the LLM can give me a bird's eye view of the subject, then it enables me to go off and do my own research and come with my own conclusions, even if they don't align with what the LLM originally told me.
The fact is, there's a ton of misinformation on the Internet. Doesn't matter if you're getting your info from an LLM or not, you should almost always be trying to get your info from multiple sources if possible.
Here are the three levels of inversion model described in the paper:
(1) Training a decoder to invert embeddings gives you some similar text, but only with some overlapping words.
(2) Training an encoder-decoder with the embedding projected up to a 'sequence' for the encoder works better, and gets more words back, but almost never gets the right text back exactly, especially when sequences are long.
(3) Training this fancy architecture as a 'correction' model that recursively corrects and re-embeds text works really well. It turns out that search is necessary for this kind of thing, and can get many texts back exactly.
A fourth option would be to simply scale the inversion model up by 10x or 100x, which would give us predictably better performance. We didn't try this because it's just not that interesting.
The first commit I ever made was on a fork of one of your projects over 5 years ago. I wasn't a software engineer then, I was just some guy learning to code in his free time.
Anyways I just wanted to say thank you. I know it may seem silly. But your code gave me the scaffolding I needed to take some important first steps towards where I am today. I'm now a senior software engineer/team lead!
If you were curious, here's the fork: https://github.com/brendenriggs/GottaSlackEmAll
I've got to say: I don't play any more, but I definitely miss those early day when Pokemon Go first came out. Good times.
Neither matters.
Starting matters.
If it is simple, you will complete it. Completing electronics projects is a useful habit.
If it is too complex, you will fail.
Failing is a useful habit.
Failing is what learning looks like when there isn’t a curriculum with lowered hurdles.
Shopping for a Goldilocks’ porridge is easier than failing. It is easier than easy projects. Shopping feels like work, but it’s not.
Just work. It is the simplest thing that might work.
Good luck.
I did notice that it referred Spinoza as if his views were in opposition to Panpsychism.
Spinoza actually proposed that God(consciousness) exists within all things, and that studying physics and the nature of the universe is to study the psychology of God.
Like he's literally mentioned on the SEP page for Panpsychism [1]
I see where chatGPT would get confused. Spinoza is identified as a Rationalist, which is generally more aligned towards determinist thought.
Looking at it, I wonder if perhaps Spinoza's views are already in alignment with both Deterministic and Panpsychist thoughts (which, as others have mentioned, are not inherently mutually exclusive anyway).
I'm long accustomed to spelling it, in English, as Jujitsu. I've also seen Jiu-jitsu. "jutsu" is much less common, IME.
Is there such thing as canonical Romanisation of Nipponese? I can deal with a project being "wrong" better than not knowing which of us is wrong.
As a Brazilian Jiu Jitsu practitioner, I cringe when I see it spelled any other way, but also I have to recognize that I only feel that way because I have more exposure to that specific martial art/spelling.
/s
But really, I come to HN for quality content. Regardless of topic, posts tend to lean towards the direction of intellectual honesty and good-faith arguments.
This post isn't that.
I always did a week on internet literacy, and would open the lesson with a worksheet that included this fella, along with a number of other fake animals, and some that look fake, but aren't.
Each kid was supposed to come up with a summary of what the animal was, where they live, what they eat, etc.
It was a lot of fun, but I've got to say... Parents: please take some time to teach your kids how to critically evaluate information that they read online.
What's interesting is that people who had lived in that neighborhood nearly 20 years together had never talked, and met for the first time as both stopped to chat at nearly the same time.
Then we started with small gifts, usually food because my wife cooks exotic things for people to try. Now we get random gifts, usually food or fruits or some flower or plant.
Now we have little get togethers inviting each other, text to ask if need anything from the store, etc. And all it took was being willing to sit outside for a couple hours each night and say hi.