sgdfhijfgsdfgds (u/sgdfhijfgsdfgds)

sgdfhijfgsdfgds commented on Microsoft and OpenAI's close partnership shows signs of fraying nytimes.com/2024/10/17/te... · Posted by u/jhunter1016

chasd00 · a year ago

Both political parties in the US have adopted a “you’re either with us or you’re the enemy” position.

sgdfhijfgsdfgds · a year ago

1) not really, only one of them talks about opponents as enemies

2) the leader of only one of them is threatening to lock up journalists, shut down broadcasters, and use the military against his enemies.

3) only one of them led an attempted autogolpe that was condemned at the time by all sides

4) Musk is only backing the one described in 1, 2 and 3 above.

It's not really arguable, all this stuff.

The guy who thinks the USA should go to Mars clearly thinks he's better throwing in his lot with the whiny strongman dude who is on record -- via his own social media platform -- as saying that the giant imaginary fraud he projected to explain his humiliating loss was a reason to terminate the Constitution.

And he's putting a lot of money into it, and co-running the ground game. But sure, he wants to go to Mars. So it's all good.

sgdfhijfgsdfgds commented on Worldcoin has a new Orb and is now just World theverge.com/2024/10/18/2... · Posted by u/thunderbong

Centigonal · a year ago

You stand in front of the Orb. The Orb scans your biometric data and stores it in Sam's Database (Sam says he doesn't own the database, something something blockchain good of humanity - but Sam doesn't "own" OpenAI either).

Once the Orb gathers enough people's biometrics, the Orb will become the gatekeeper for transactions. The Orb will verify your identity and humanity. Sam's Database will be more precise than your social security number, more secure than your bank login, internationally transcendent, and secured by the rigid and infallible laws of cryptocurrency. The history of crypto has shown us that ownership of tokens is a good and safe way to verify people's identities and uniqueness, and that fraud is basically impossible with these systems.

National governments will use Sam's Database to assign Universal Basic Income as AGI decimates the need for labor, shortly before they collapse and give way to the AI world government. Sam's database will contain the unique identifiers of every human, giving our benevolent AI overlord a head start on getting to know us all and making our lives richer and more wonderful than we could possibly dream, by [unspecified].

Prostrate yourself before the Orb. Give it your most ineffable data. Invest your money in Sam's database. He is a responsible steward.

sgdfhijfgsdfgds · a year ago

I often wonder if Peter Thiel is somewhere, laughing bitterly into a glass of terrible overpriced gin that only a billionaire would drink: "this fuckin' guy... this is my schtick"

sgdfhijfgsdfgds commented on Worldcoin has a new Orb and is now just World theverge.com/2024/10/18/2... · Posted by u/thunderbong

sgdfhijfgsdfgds · a year ago

I'm sure this is fine, and there is no reason to be concerned that the same very rich person is behind this device as the AI technology whose worst outcomes it exists to combat.

Also there's a blockchain so that's great! I know you're not a crypto evangelist on Twitter anymore, or an NFT evangelist, and now you're an AI consultant and solutions provider. But here it is -- that great application for the blockchain you were all so sure was coming all along.

All tied up with one neat looped bow that can make you feel like it isn't somehow some empty, culture-destroying, billionaire-welfare griftapolooza.

And it's even a bit YCombinator because Sam Altman, right? He was always going to make it. He's got the killer instinct.

sgdfhijfgsdfgds commented on Microsoft and OpenAI's close partnership shows signs of fraying nytimes.com/2024/10/17/te... · Posted by u/jhunter1016

cynicalpeace · a year ago

Musk kicks butt and is taking us to space. He proves my theory.

sgdfhijfgsdfgds · a year ago

Ehhh though he does seem to think that taking the USA to fascism is a prerequisite.

(This is, I think, an apolitical observation: whatever you think about Trump, he is arguing for a pretty major restructuring of political power in a manner that is identifiable in fascism. And Musk is, pretty unarguably, bankrolling this.)

sgdfhijfgsdfgds commented on Use Prolog to improve LLM's reasoning shchegrikovich.substack.c... · Posted by u/shchegrikovich

timonoko · a year ago

Interest in Prolog always ends with the "!". It is ugly and like smack in the head, "you are thinking too much".

sgdfhijfgsdfgds · a year ago

The course I did at uni, decades ago now, set us a Prolog assessment where we were not allowed to use the cut operator.

Code that backtracks is hard to reason about.

sgdfhijfgsdfgds commented on Use Prolog to improve LLM's reasoning shchegrikovich.substack.c... · Posted by u/shchegrikovich

shchegrikovich · a year ago

I have another example - just a few people believed that you can apply 'a simple next token prediction algorithm' and achieve what we know as LLM. From my perspective, in the past few years, we've tried a lot of different approaches to improve LLM reasoning; some of them were good, others not so good. We need to keep trying and researching. 'Prolog + LLM' is not the answer to all questions, but it looks like a good step to move us forward.

sgdfhijfgsdfgds · a year ago

> 'Prolog + LLM' is not the answer to all questions, but it looks like a good step to move us forward.

Or it's a thing people can write papers about, and chase reproducibility on afterwards, as the shell game of claiming LLM reasoning continues.

sgdfhijfgsdfgds commented on Use Prolog to improve LLM's reasoning shchegrikovich.substack.c... · Posted by u/shchegrikovich

YeGoblynQueenne · a year ago

You'll have to be more specific than that. For me what I point out is obvious: Prolog is not magick. Your program won't magickally reason if you write it in Prolog, much less reason correctly. If an LLM translates a Problem to the wrong Prolog program, Prolog won't magickally turn it into a correct program. And that's just rephrasing what I said in my comment above. There's really not much more to say.

Here's just one more observation: the problems where translating reasoning to Prolog will work best are problems where there are a lot of examples of Prolog to be found on the web, e.g. wolf-cabbage-goat problems and the like. With problems like that it is much easier for an LLM to generate a correct translation of the problem to Prolog and get a correct solution just because there's lots of examples. But if you choose a problem that's rarely attacked with Prolog code, like, I don't know, some mathematical problem that obtains in nuclear physics as a for instance, then an LLM will be much more likely to generate garbage Prolog, while e.g. Fortran would be a better target language. From what I can see, the papers linked in the article above concentrate on the Prolog-friendly kind of problem, like logical puzzles and the like. That smells like cherry picking to me, or just good, old confirmation bias.

Again, Prolog is not magick. The article above and the papers it links to seem to take this attitude of "just add Prolog" and that will make LLMs suddenly magickally reason with fairy dust on top. Ain't gonna happen.

sgdfhijfgsdfgds · a year ago

> Again, Prolog is not magick. The article above and the papers it links to seem to take this attitude of "just add Prolog" and that will make LLMs suddenly magickally reason with fairy dust on top. Ain't gonna happen.

It frightens me that HN is so popular with people who will strain credulity in this regard. It's like a whole decade of people engaging in cosmic-ordering wishes about crypto has now led to those same people wishing for new things as if the wishes themselves are evidence of future outcomes.

sgdfhijfgsdfgds commented on Use Prolog to improve LLM's reasoning shchegrikovich.substack.c... · Posted by u/shchegrikovich

Philpax · a year ago

This is a shallow critique that does not engage with the core idea. Specifying the problem is not the same as solving the problem.

sgdfhijfgsdfgds · a year ago

It's actually pretty concise: Prolog isn't all that easy! That's why people don't use it.

Competent CS students fail Prolog courses all the time. A lot of Prolog on the internet will either be wrong, or it will be so riddled with unnecessary/unclear backtracking that an LLM won't be able to make more sense of it than it does words.

sgdfhijfgsdfgds commented on Use Prolog to improve LLM's reasoning shchegrikovich.substack.c... · Posted by u/shchegrikovich

treetalker · a year ago

Does anyone know why US attorneys and law firms are not using Prolog-based apps to automate the low-hanging fruit of issue-spotting?

sgdfhijfgsdfgds · a year ago

Because Prolog is difficult, and expressing fuzzy real-world facts and nuances in it is harder.

sgdfhijfgsdfgds commented on Use Prolog to improve LLM's reasoning shchegrikovich.substack.c... · Posted by u/shchegrikovich

sgdfhijfgsdfgds · a year ago

This is magical thinking. If an LLM can’t reason it isn’t going to be able to express itself clearly in Prolog.

Suggesting otherwise is intellectually on the same level as trying to make up a small consistent per-sale loss with volume.

sgdfhijfgsdfgds · a year ago

I know we're not supposed to comment on downvotes but I really question the logic of anyone who thinks that a thing that cannot reason can write a prolog program that is really going to be much more successful.

Prolog is actually pretty difficult to do right, even if you are skilled. It actually requires reasoning. You don't just write out facts and have the system do the work. And many of the examples in the training set will be wrong, naturally simplistic or be full of backtracking that is itself difficult for a person to comprehend at a glance; why should an LLM be better at it? There can't even be that much data in the training set.

Ultimately, though: stop believing in magical solutions to fundamental problems. This is nuts.