NeilBrü

Yes, I agree wholeheartedly with your clarification.

My career path, as I stated in a different comment in regards to neural networks, is focused on generative DNNs for CAD applications and parametric 3D modeling. Before that, I began as a researcher in cancerous tissue classification and object detection in medical diagnostic imaging.

Thus, large language models are well out of my area of expertise in terms of the architecture of their models.

However, fundamentally it boils down to the fact that the specific large language model used was designed to predict text and not necessarily solve problems/play games to “win”/“survive”.

(I admit that I’m just parroting what you stated and maybe rehashing what I stated even before that, but I like repeating and refining in simple terms to practice explaining to laymen and, dare I say, clients. It helps me feel as if I don’t come off too pompously when talking about this subject to others; forgive my tedium.)

Dude, I said the same thing after I read that reply! 😂

Absolutely interested. Thank you for your time to share that.

My career path in neural networks began as a researcher for cancerous tissue object detection in medical diagnostic imaging. Now it is switched to generative models for CAD (architecture, product design, game assets, etc.). I don’t really mess about with fine-tuning LLMs.

However, I do self-host my own LLMs as code assistants. Thus, I’m only tangentially involved with the current LLM craze.

But it does interest me, nonetheless!

I’m impressed, if that’s true! In general, an LLM’s training cost vs. an LSTM, RNN, or some other more appropriate DNN algorithm suitable for the ruleset is laughably high.

It’s a quote from the novel, 1984.

WHYYYYYYYYUUHHHHH

Now I will tell you the answer to my question. It is this. The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just around the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me.

George Orwell, 1984

An LLM is a poor computational/predictive paradigm for playing chess.

Mullvad DNS has been great also.

The crash-out of BJ Penn that’s been drawn out for years now continues to be a crying shame.

I have to admit, I had to re-read your response several times to comprehend your points properly.

No slight intended to you; this subject has always been difficult for me to parse correctly and, in turn, respond with any thoughtful or logical relevance. My expression of thought tends to be more clumsy than I would like to admit.

After some consideration of your reply, I think the answer to my question is that TERF position suffers from both of the fallacies I listed in my original supposition, and probably many more that I’m not recalling or aware of.

Considering your two following statements:

TIRFs are not opposed to maleness.

and…

Daly was a wacky Catholic theologian who turned God into a mom, and decided that women were just special magical spiritual beings. This devotion to some kind of divine womanhood is common among the lesbian separatist types

…would it be safe to conclude that TERFs do (in a way) oppose the “maleness” of the Y chromosome as an affront to the purity of their “feminity”? I know I’m repeating my question, but their ethos reminded me of the “single-drop-of blood” policies on ethnic identity from the segregationists of the American South.

It’s certainly an absurdity, and many times a dark one at that, observing upon what proverbial hills people choose to die on publicly these days.

I wonder: does she admit to identifying with or publicly support the Tories, Nigel Farage and/or other “Brexiteers”, or other conservative personalities and politicians within the UK? Generally speaking, I refuse to use the “Alt-Right” label, as contend that there’s nothing “alternative” to naked authoritarian conservatism about it.

I suppose I should just look it up, but I thought I’d ask.

J.K. Rowling is using her wealth attained from the Harry Potter series to create an organization dedicated to removing transgender people’s rights "in the workplace, in public life, and in protected female spaces.”

I need some help with this topic.

I never got into Harry Potter; I watched some of the older films, but I’ve never read the books. I was born in ‘83, so it never hit me like the folks in my younger brother’s and little cousins’ generation. I only knew of Rowling’s statements about trans people over the years tangentially and largely dismissed it as background noise. I assumed that she considers herself a TERF (trans-exclusionary radical feminist), as opposed to a TIRF (trans-inclusive radical feminist).

On the assumption that I’m correct about her position, what is the true essence of the disagreement between TERFs and TIRFs?

Is it that the presence of the Y chromosome in male-to-female trans people inherently adds a fundamental “maleness” that “true feminists” must inherently oppose due to the overt and implied threats to women that “maleness” represents?

Is it simply a feminist version of a “No True Scotsman” fallacy or an “Appeal to Nature” fallacy?

Maybe both?

Oof, ok, my apologies.

I am, admittedly, “GPU rich”; I have ~48GB of VRAM at my disposal on my main workstation, and 24GB on my gaming rig. Thus, I am using Q8 and Q6_L quantized .gguf files.

Naturally, my experience with the “fidelity” of my LLM models re: hallucinations would be better.

Self-hosted LLMs are the way.

Necessary Necessity is the mother of invention

Are there any ETFs that I can put money into that short Tesla for mentally handicapped retail investors like me? For example, inverse REITs are an easy way to short the housing market.

Also, the SRA.

How do people become such pieces of shit?

Chrystia Freeland, author of Plutocrats, says that the present trend towards plutocracy occurs because the rich feel that their interests are shared by society:

You don’t do this in a kind of chortling, smoking your cigar, conspiratorial thinking way. You do it by persuading yourself that what is in your own personal self-interest is in the interests of everybody else. So you persuade yourself that, actually, government services, things like spending on education, which is what created that social mobility in the first place, need to be cut so that the deficit will shrink, so that your tax bill doesn’t go up. And what I really worry about is, there is so much money and so much power at the very top, and the gap between those people at the very top and everybody else is so great, that we are going to see social mobility choked off and society transformed.

40 days should be indefinitely until management changes. As in, those who “kissed the ring” must leave.

“Deeply concerned.” How reassuring.

I still don’t want to think he’s a bad person, but for me, why he is a bad person is because zero “too-big-to-fail” CEOs went to jail during the immediate aftermath of the '08 crisis.

He could’ve nationalized the banks that were underwater. Even temporarily. The DoJ had ample evidence, precedent, and prosecutorial room to make heads roll. He was the one person who had power to do so. “Yes, we can!” became “No, I won’t.”

He’s not the only one in my lifetime to screw the American people, but as a young 25-year-old man, his betrayal stung the most in the wreckage of 2008 into '09. I voted for him. I thought I genuinely liked him.

When it came down to it, he’s actually like all the rest. Socialize the losses; privatize the gains.

Eat the billionaires. Sic semper tyrannis.

Pension funds have invested in stocks and bonds for decades.