William Martinez Pomares

62.5K posts

William Martinez Pomares banner
William Martinez Pomares

William Martinez Pomares

@willmarpo

Informático, Escritor, Músico, Cuentero y Mago cuando no me descubren. Peleón 100% Neófito polímata en mis tiempos libres Cuenta de Peloteo Tico

Costa Rica Katılım Kasım 2009
460 Takip Edilen1.9K Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
William Martinez Pomares
William Martinez Pomares@willmarpo·
Fundamentos de debate. 1. Hay debate cuando hay refutado o confirmación de ideas. Muy diferente a un concurso de gritos. 2. Hay dos formas de perder un debate: la formal que es decir "tenés razón", y la vulgar que es proferir un insulto. Sigo.
Español
1
2
15
3.1K
William Martinez Pomares retweetledi
Kelly Towerss 💫
Kelly Towerss 💫@KellyAfterDarkk·
El personaje de la serpiente en la pelicula de 'El Principito' (1974), interpretado por Bob Fusse, fue una de las principales inspiraciones de Michael Jackson para crear sus pasos de baile.
Español
90
1.1K
6K
254K
William Martinez Pomares
1. Fueron gatos terrestres que evolucionaron 2. Son seres extraterrestres que compartían con los egipcios y los gatos terrestres son una involución de ellos. El caso es que los felinos llegaron a proteger a los nativos de Munra que quiere esclavisar a todo el planeta.
Español
0
0
0
18
William Martinez Pomares
Si pueden, pasen a saludar (y compren) a la mesa de El Gato Negro. Los libros son seleccionados ahí, y el jefe es un gato negro. (El diseño del gato es de mi hermano el dibujante).
William Martinez Pomares tweet media
Español
0
0
0
12
William Martinez Pomares
Puede conocer la obra de autores independientes, y algunas librerías especializadas
William Martinez Pomares tweet mediaWilliam Martinez Pomares tweet media
Español
1
0
0
21
William Martinez Pomares
Invitados. Hoy inicia, al frente del musea Juan Santamaría, por si quieren darse una vuelta.
William Martinez Pomares tweet media
Español
1
0
0
32
William Martinez Pomares retweetledi
Science girl
Science girl@sciencegirl·
During filming of The Myth, Jackie Chan bonded with an elephant named Lakshmi in India in one scene, her instinctive was to rescue him from water, it was unscripted yet beautiful
English
160
4.9K
77.7K
1.7M
William Martinez Pomares
William Martinez Pomares@willmarpo·
Y, por si les pica la nostalgia, el tema principal del Hombre Araña del 67 fue compuesto por J. Robert Harris con letra de Paul Francis Webster (el del tema de Lara, del Dr. Shivago) youtube.com/watch?v=A43sHQ…
YouTube video
YouTube
Español
0
0
3
58
William Martinez Pomares
William Martinez Pomares@willmarpo·
La tema se llama Techno Syndrome, y fue creada para el videojuego por el grupo The Imortals. Esta nueva versión mantiene la vibra y sintetizadores viejos, pero remosa otros sonidos para actualizarla. youtube.com/watch?v=EmqLaE…
YouTube video
YouTube
Español
1
0
2
177
William Martinez Pomares
William Martinez Pomares@willmarpo·
Yo tampoco sabía, la verdad. Pero, si se nota bien, la bola no pasa "por encima de la red" sino que va por fuera. Si pasara por encima, se considera que pasó a campo rival y eso no se puede. Como va por fuera, se permite ir a "rescatar" la bola, pero sin entrar al otro campo.
Jomboy@Jomboy_

I learned something new about volleyball

Español
0
0
0
129
William Martinez Pomares
William Martinez Pomares@willmarpo·
No sé por qué es "SHOCKING". Estamos hablando de un LLM, me parece más bien una burla analizar el razonamiento matemático de un LLM. No sé, como analizar la capacidad de taladro de una bicicleta. Y ese abstract, suena a LLM como caja opaca mágica, sin saber cómo funciona. 😔
Nav Toor@heynavtoor

🚨SHOCKING: Apple just proved that AI models cannot do math. Not advanced math. Grade school math. The kind a 10-year-old solves. And the way they proved it is devastating. Apple researchers took the most popular math benchmark in AI — GSM8K, a set of grade-school math problems — and made one change. They swapped the numbers. Same problem. Same logic. Same steps. Different numbers. Every model's performance dropped. Every single one. 25 state-of-the-art models tested. But that wasn't the real experiment. The real experiment broke everything. They added one sentence to a math problem. One sentence that is completely irrelevant to the answer. It has nothing to do with the math. A human would read it and ignore it instantly. Here's the actual example from the paper: "Oliver picks 44 kiwis on Friday. Then he picks 58 kiwis on Saturday. On Sunday, he picks double the number of kiwis he did on Friday, but five of them were a bit smaller than average. How many kiwis does Oliver have?" The correct answer is 190. The size of the kiwis has nothing to do with the count. A 10-year-old would ignore "five of them were a bit smaller" because it's obviously irrelevant. It doesn't change how many kiwis there are. But o1-mini, OpenAI's reasoning model, subtracted 5. It got 185. Llama did the same thing. Subtracted 5. Got 185. They didn't reason through the problem. They saw the number 5, saw a sentence that sounded like it mattered, and blindly turned it into a subtraction. The models do not understand what subtraction means. They see a pattern that looks like subtraction and apply it. That is all. Apple tested this across all models. They call the dataset "GSM-NoOp" — as in, the added clause is a no-operation. It does nothing. It changes nothing. The results are catastrophic. Phi-3-mini dropped over 65%. More than half of its "math ability" vanished from one irrelevant sentence. GPT-4o dropped from 94.9% to 63.1%. o1-mini dropped from 94.5% to 66.0%. o1-preview, OpenAI's most advanced reasoning model at the time, dropped from 92.7% to 77.4%. Even giving the models 8 examples of the exact same question beforehand, with the correct solution shown each time, barely helped. The models still fell for the irrelevant clause. This means it's not a prompting problem. It's not a context problem. It's structural. The Apple researchers also found that models convert words into math operations without understanding what those words mean. They see the word "discount" and multiply. They see a number near the word "smaller" and subtract. Regardless of whether it makes any sense. The paper's exact words: "current LLMs are not capable of genuine logical reasoning; instead, they attempt to replicate the reasoning steps observed in their training data." And: "LLMs likely perform a form of probabilistic pattern-matching and searching to find closest seen data during training without proper understanding of concepts." They also tested what happens when you increase the number of steps in a problem. Performance didn't just decrease. The rate of decrease accelerated. Adding two extra clauses to a problem dropped Gemma2-9b from 84.4% to 41.8%. Phi-3.5-mini from 87.6% to 44.8%. The more thinking required, the more the models collapse. A real reasoner would slow down and work through it. These models don't slow down. They pattern-match. And when the pattern becomes complex enough, they crash. This paper was published at ICLR 2025, one of the most prestigious AI conferences in the world. You are using AI to help you make financial decisions. To check legal documents. To solve problems at work. To help your children with homework. And Apple just proved that the AI is not thinking about any of it. It is pattern matching. And the moment something unexpected shows up in your question, it breaks. It does not tell you it broke. It just quietly gives you the wrong answer with full confidence.

Español
0
0
1
91