wadadadad (u/wadadadad)

wadadadad commented on Ask HN: How are Markov chains so different from tiny LLMs? · Posted by u/JPLeRouzic

shagie · a month ago

In my sibling comment, I linked the chat session where I prompted ChatGPT for possible answers and reasoning.

https://chatgpt.com/share/6920b9e2-764c-8011-a14a-012e97573f...

    Given the following riddle, identify the object to which it refers.
    #
    Chaos erupts around
    The shape moot
    The goal is key
    #
    Identify 10 different possible answers and identify the reasoning behind each guess and why it may or may not be correct.

The second item in the possible answers:

    Soccer ball
    Why it fits:
        “Chaos erupts around”: Players cluster and scramble around the ball; wherever it goes, chaos follows.
        “The shape moot”: Modern footballs vary in panel design and surface texture, but they must all be broadly spherical; to the game itself, variations in cosmetic shape are mostly irrelevant.
        “The goal is key”: Everyone’s objective is to get the ball into the goal.
    Why it might not be correct:
        The third line emphasizes the goal, which points more strongly to the scoring structure or concept of scoring rather than the ball.

wadadadad · a month ago

Interesting that here ChatGPT was able to generally get the correct idea! Two points:

The answer is not specifically 'soccer ball', but just ball. I don't think that I would deem that as acceptable, though certainly it's very close! Maybe others would disagree, haha, and as I stated above, I do think riddles are open to interpretation.

Second, as to why my own prompting didn't get- I didn't specify 'identify the object'. I wonder if prompting that it wasn't necessarily a physical thing was helpful enough to get it significantly closer (still funny that the first answer I received was 'escape room').

As to GP: - in sports with balls, there is 'chaos'. I was aiming more from the audience. In some of the larger arenas of professional sports, there's a complete ruckus on certain actions. - The shape is moot; there's many different kinds of 'balls'. Compare football to soccer to tennis. - Balls all have an objective, a goal, usually to get the ball to a specific location ('goal' in the typical sense, but the vagueness could imply general use as well). This was mostly to imply a sense of purpose and use of the riddle's answer.

Again, not saying this is the best riddle ever, just trying to make a point.

wadadadad commented on Ask HN: How are Markov chains so different from tiny LLMs? · Posted by u/JPLeRouzic

shagie · a month ago

The challenge is: for someone who is convinced that an LLM is only presenting material that they've seen before that was created by some human, how do you show them something that hasn't been seen before?

(Digging in old chats one from 2024 this one is amusing ... https://chatgpt.com/share/af1c12d5-dfeb-4c76-a74f-f03f48ce3b... was a fun one - epic rap battle between Paul Graham and Commander Taco )

Many people seem to believe that the LLM is not much more than a collage of words that it stole from other places and likewise images are a collage of images stolen from other people's pictures. (I've had people on reddit (which tends to be rather AI hostile outside of specific AI subs) downvote me for explaining how to use an LLM as an editor for your own writing or pointing out that some generative image systems are built on top of libraries where the company had rights (e.g. stock photography) to all the images)

With the wizards, I'm not interested necessarily in the correct solution, but rather how it did it and what the representation of the response was. I selected everything with 'W' to see how it handled identifying the different things.

As to riddles... that's really a question of mind reading. Your riddle isn't one that I can solve. Maybe if you told me the answer I'd understand how you got from the answer to the question, but I've got no idea how to go from the hint to a possible answer (does that make me an LLM?)

I feel its a question much more along some other classic riddles...

    “What have I got in my pocket?" he said aloud. He was talking to himself, but Gollum thought it was a riddle, and he was frightfully upset. "Not fair! not fair!" he hissed. "It isn't fair, my precious, is it, to ask us what it's got in its nassty little pocketsess?”

What do I have in my pocket? (and then a bit of "what would it do with that prompt?") https://chatgpt.com/s/t_691fa7e9b49081918a4ef8bdc6accb97

At this point, I'm much more of the opinion that some people are on "team anti-ai" and that it has become part of their identity to be against anything that makes use of AI to augment what a human can do unaided. Attempting to show that it's not a stochastic parrot or next token predictors (anymore than humans are) or that it can do things that help people (when used responsibly by the human) gets met with hostility.

I believe that this comes from the group identity and some of the things of group dynamics. https://gwern.net/doc/technology/2005-shirky-agroupisitsownw...

> The second basic pattern that Bion detailed is the identification and vilification of external enemies. This is a very common pattern. Anyone who was around the open source movement in the mid-1990s could see this all the time. If you cared about Linux on the desktop, there was a big list of jobs to do. But you could always instead get a conversation going about Microsoft and Bill Gates. And people would start bleeding from their ears, they would get so mad.

> ...

> Nothing causes a group to galvanize like an external enemy. So even if someone isn’t really your enemy, identifying them as an enemy can cause a pleasant sense of group cohesion. And groups often gravitate toward members who are the most paranoid and make them leaders, because those are the people who are best at identifying external enemies.

wadadadad · a month ago

I don't think riddles are necessarily 'solvable' in that there's only one right answer; the very fact that they're open to interpretation, but when you get the 'right' answer it (hopefully) makes sense. So if an AI/LLM can answer such a nebulous thing correctly- that's more of the angle I was going at.

Regarding the wizards example, I'm a bit confused; I was thinking that the best way to judge answers for problem solving/creativity was for correctness. I'll think more on whether the 'thought process' counts in and of itself.

The answer to my riddle is 'ball'.

wadadadad commented on Ask HN: How are Markov chains so different from tiny LLMs? · Posted by u/JPLeRouzic

shagie · a month ago

Make up a fanciful problem and ask it to solve it. For example, https://chatgpt.com/s/t_691f6c260d38819193de0374f090925a is unlikely to be found in the training data - I just made it up. Another example of wizards and witches and warriors and summoning... https://chatgpt.com/share/691f6cfe-cfc8-8011-b8ca-70e2c22d36... - I doubt that was in the training data either.

Make up puzzles of your own and see if it is able to solve it or not.

The blanket claim of "cannot solve problems that are not in its training data" seems to be something that can be disproven by making up a puzzle from your own human creativity and seeing if it can solve it - or for that matter, how it attempts to solve it.

It appears that there is some ability for it to reason about new things. I believe that much of this "an LLM can't do X" or "an LLM is parroting tokens that it was trained on" comes from trying to claim that all the material that it creates was created before, by a human and any use of an LLM is stealing from some human and thus unethical to use.

( ... and maybe if my block world or wizards and warriors and witches puzzle was in the training data somewhere, I'm unconsciously copying something somewhere else and my own use of it is unethical. )

wadadadad · a month ago

This is an interesting idea, but as you stated, it's all logic; it's hard to come up with an idea where you don't have to explain concepts yet still is dissimilar enough to be in the training.

In your second example with the wizards- did you notice that it failed to follow the rules? Step 3, the witch was summoned by the wizard. I'm curious as to why you didn't comment either way on this.

On a related note, instead of puzzles, what about presenting riddles? I would argue that riddles are creative, pulling bits and pieces of meaning from words to create an answer. If AI can solve riddles not seen before, would that count as creative and not solving problems in their dataset?

Here's one I created and presented (the first incorrect answer I got was Escape Room; I gave it 10 attempts and it didn't get the answer I was thinking of):

---

Solve the riddle:

Chaos erupts around

The shape moot

The goal is key

wadadadad commented on Wholesale prices rose 0.9% in July, more than expected cnbc.com/2025/08/14/ppi-i... · Posted by u/belter

FredPret · 4 months ago

I don't know how this is even a talking point.

The top 5% of taxpayers in the USA pay 61% of the taxes.

The top 1% pay 30-40% of all the taxes and have done so for decades.

https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/

https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/latest-federal-in...

wadadadad · 4 months ago

When the top 5% makes 3x more than the bottom 50%? The top 5% makes 38% of the total, while the top 1% alone makes 22%, per the same sources you just quoted. Yes, the ones who make the most can afford to pay the most in taxes.

You didn't even cover GP's main point about getting the top to even pay taxes; the top 1%, per your own source, only pays 26%, while the top 50% pays 16%.

Top x% tax bracket should at least be 32%, per current brackets. So one could argue they aren't even paying what they 'should'. https://www.irs.gov/filing/federal-income-tax-rates-and-brac...

wadadadad commented on Tell HN: I underestimated how lonely building solo can be · Posted by u/paulwilsonn

yieldcrv · 5 months ago

Oh god, then you’ll be like one of those founders calling them family because you have no friends

Just talk to an AI and go volunteer at a farmers market

wadadadad · 5 months ago

I onboarded a junior (not an intern though) as an otherwise solo engineer, and there definitely is something different about both being able to explain to them in such as way that they start to understand, and also watching them grow. I find it fulfilling, something that I don't think can be replicated with AI (and also good for everyone in sharing experience). Maybe it helps that the junior is very interested in the job and growing.

That being said, there's also a lot of time in teaching and explaining that isn't directly pushing work forward, so there's that to consider.

wadadadad commented on Dumb Pipe dumbpipe.dev/... · Posted by u/udev4096

jerf · 5 months ago

"Interested to know how you've been burnt by wireguard; what did it not do that you were expecting?"

Speaking just for myself, I expected it to be as easy to set up as Tailscale. Not to be set up in exactly the same manner as Tailscale, I understand they are not identical technologies, but I expected the difficulty to be within spitting distance of each other.

Instead I fussed with Wireguard for a few days without it ever working for even the simplest case and had Tailscale up and running in 5 minutes.

I think I recognize the pattern; it's one that has plagued Linux networking in general for decades. The internet is full of "this guy's configuration file that worked once", and then people banging on that without understanding, and the entire internet is just people banging on things they don't understand, 80% of which are for obsolete versions of obsolete features in obsolete kernels, until the search engines are so flooded with these things that if there is a perfect and beautiful guide to understanding exactly how this all works together and gives the necessary understanding to fix the problems yourself it's too buried to ever find. It also doesn't help that these networking technologies are some of the worst when it comes to error messages and diagnosis. Was I one character away from functionality, or was my entire approach fundamentally flawed and I was miles from it working? Who's to say, it all equally silently fails to work in the end.

wadadadad · 5 months ago

Out of curiosity, what references were you looking at for the setup?

wadadadad commented on Celebrating 20 Years of MDN developer.mozilla.org/en-... · Posted by u/soheilpro

susam · 5 months ago

I could fulfil my childhood dream of creating a space-invaders-like game [1], much later as an adult [2], thanks to MDN!

The excellent documentation for the Canvas API [3] and OscillatorNode [4] on MDN made it quite easy to get started with developing the game.

[1] https://susam.net/invaders.html

[2] https://github.com/susam/invaders#why

[3] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Canvas_API

[4] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/OscillatorN...

wadadadad · 5 months ago

I want to say that the game play was really well done, I really enjoyed the progression (speed of enemies, number of enemies, how quickly they descended) and mechanics (being able to shoot their bullets!)! I don't recall exactly how the original invaders worked, so I'm not sure how much was copied vs changed, but I very much enjoyed this as a brief break. Thank you!

wadadadad commented on Pentagon to terminate $5.1B in IT contracts with Accenture, Deloitte reuters.com/world/us/pent... · Posted by u/oldprogrammer2

CityOfThrowaway · 8 months ago

The data on hostile takeovers by "corporate raiders" very much does not support the characterization here.

The category of PE firms you're talking about buy companies that are deeply troubled. Generally due to the management's unwillingness to accept reality and make change, the company is heading towards oblivion one way or another.

Perhaps surprisingly, the vast majority of takeover targets wind up as net job creators on a 5-10 year time horizons. That's despite the fact that they do usually start by divesting assets that don't make sense and laying off non-productive employees. But divested assets aren't generally killed – they are usually sold to somebody else who often does something better with it.

Also, companies conduct massive downsizing and rationalization all the time when in distress, and not only when they are taken over by a "corporate raider".

In the private markets, these actors are definitely distasteful. They do cleanup work that feels bad, and they often get rich doing it. But they also serve a necessary role in the markets.

Companies that are egregiously misusing capital and resources are a drag on the economy. It's a bad thing for there to be a bunch of zombie companies holding onto assets that could be used in better ways.

A more generous framing would be something like a home flipper. They buy properties that are a mess, clean it up real good, throw out the old stuff for recycling, install some modern appliances, and sell it to somebody else.

One of my laments is that there is no automatic equivalent force in the government. Agencies grow and grow, projects grow and grow, all totally decoupled from whether they are achieving any progress whatsoever towards the agency's mission.

I'm not defending the specific actions of this administration (for which I simply don't know enough), but it is refreshing to see the government rummaging through its mess and cutting stuff that is irrational, corrupt, and not serving the mission.

wadadadad · 8 months ago

This deviated from the original topic, and I'm not following your metaphor flows. How does your post relate to consultants specifically? Is there an implication that consultants not part of the 'mess'?

You say "No automatic force... whether (the agencies) are achieving any progress)". Don't we have oversight agencies and committees? I'm not following your 'grow and grow'; can you provide evidence that all agencies just 'grow and grow' without achieving progress? If not all agencies, then be specific.

Also, what evidence is there of "stuff" that is "irrational, corrupt, and not serving the mission"? Which mission? What corruption? What evidence of this? Can you speak more specifically here?

Please provide evidence to claims so we can have an discussion around this.

wadadadad commented on FOSS infrastructure is under attack by AI companies thelibre.news/foss-infras... · Posted by u/todsacerdoti

mistrial9 · 9 months ago

it is an ecosystem of social roles, not just "people" .. casting the decision into individual choices is not the right filter to understand this situation..

wadadadad · 9 months ago

I'm not sure I'm following what you mean by 'social roles'. Which roles are you referring to here?

I'll disagree that it's not at least individual malicious choice, though. Someone decided that they needed to fake/change user agents (as one example), and implemented it. Most likely it was more than one person- some manager(s)/teams probably also either suggested or agreed to this choice.

I would like to think at some point in this decision making process, someone would have considered 'is it ethical to change user agents to get around bans? Is it ethical to ignore robots.txt?' and decided not to proceed, but apparently that's not happening here...

wadadadad commented on NIH.gov DNS servers down, making PubMed, BLAST, etc. unreachable [fixed] nslookup.io/domains/www.n... · Posted by u/raphman

raphman · 10 months ago

According to a comment on Reddit, search problems have been existing for some time - they did not just appear after the DNS issue [1].

Also, I just searched for "transgender" on nih.gov, and got lots of hits [2], the first one being a publication on PubMed [3].

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/NIH/comments/1j28ytk/comment/mfs14d...

[2] https://search.nih.gov/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&affiliate=nih&q...

[3] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34993517/

wadadadad · 10 months ago

I appreciate your attempt to clarify here, but your citation link above in 2) is for 'trangender', a misspelling (but it does search successfully).

This isn't a 'search problem'; searching for 'gender' and 'transgender' always and immediately redirects back to the main page. I also tested several unrelated searches without any issues (HIV, genome, public, potato).