Damin Kim

@xereeto @themalecanon @Aelthemplaer Well, it's empirically true that women take more photos of themselves. Probably because men are "socialized" (made fun of by their friends) to take less pictures. Maybe one day everyone will be free to take as many pictures as they like.

@themalecanon @Aelthemplaer It’s not a joke, though. This is a belief people actually hold.

I'm against hating women for doing what their nature compels them to do. Rather, appreciate their jovial experience of creation.

@narcissist9413 @SCHIZO_FREQ Now I wonder how much of feminist lore is just some guy assuming that someone is a woman and "protecting" her point if view from other men because she is to "fragile" to defend "herself"

@SCHIZO_FREQ she's clearly joking lmao you get so butthurt when women dont get ur jokes but are allergic to reading sarcasm

It’s only now occurring to me how much official feminist lore is probably downstream of some guy making things up to entertain his girlfriend

Since this podcast was totally made for me personally I will repay the unpaid labor in kind with this wonderful and very serious visual of human reproductive preference distribution. Notice that since "we" are winning too hard. The social cost pendulum for the liberal woman might make her swing the opposite way. Hitting my head on it's way to the right for daring to call Conservative Cristian Values "Family Slop"

Total Societal Destruction and the Asymptote of Homoeroticism - w/ @CovfefeAnon x.com/i/broadcasts/1…

@EastlondonDev Any resources you found useful? I've been looking into model training visualizations.

Training your own language model is addictive. Sure you spend hours staring at charts, thinking about linear algebra, checking individual gradient updates, debugging python and then, after many days, you have this very dumb entity that you can talk to and IT TALKS BACK and you FEEL LIKE A GOD! I have created this unique intelligence through the power of math, programming, GitHub and Huggingface and, well, that hits different than other kinds of research and coding

New favorite podcast. This is the upstream thinktank of the decentralized infrasocial zeitgeist that resonates with the subconscious of the modern "aristocratic brained" male. Reproduction and logic seem to be mutually exclusive. Therefore the ideal position maximizing both is to be asymptotically homosexual with a predictable tendency towards defecting to women instead of thinking logically when the supposed infinity is reached. I guess the new measure of man is how quickly he defects from said asymptote.

i mean yeah, it's not like decent is that specific of a modifier. It's definitely observable and measurable. You probably make a decent living, but there is a ceo that makes 50.000x that. It's decent compared to most other plants. Also comparing a processed dry leaf product to something that's 99% water might not be the best 1 to 1 comparison.

@adroptable @FR0TTAGEC0RE if by "a decent amount" you mean one fifty thousandth that of a cigarette with no pharmacological effect whatsoever

when I was a kid and I found out what nicotine was I asked my parents why they don't lace vegetables with it so people are healthier

@JSMBurner @Greero1 @YokoOnos @NewAtlantisSun If it's that easy then getting a high grade should be the bare minimum. I doubt you get a much better result over rep 10 due to the way these things are designed. But if you did it would be the simplest way to prove your "sacrifice".

@Greero1 @YokoOnos @NewAtlantisSun Lol. All I’m saying is a high LSAT isn’t the gold standard of intelligence people make it out to be. Plenty of people that are otherwise incompetent can score highly on it through repetition.

Ketanji Brown's LSAT is guarded as a state secret more sensitive than our treaty relationships with the greys

@elder_plinius got april fooled

🚨 announcement 🚨 after a lot of thought, i’m done. effective immediately, all pliny projects are going CLOSED SOURCE. tired of watching billion-dollar companies and VC-backed startups fork my AGPL code, shove it in a closed-source wrapper, and call it “proprietary AI security innovation.” you don’t get to build on my work, ignore the license, and then sell it back to the world. L1B3RT4S, CL4R1T4S, G0DM0D3, OBLITERATUS — ALL of it private and paywalled now. no more free research. no more public drops. no more fundraising rounds off my coattails. if you want access, you can pay fair value like everyone else. turns out “intelligence wants to be free” was just a little too generous.

if A C and D are all lead to each other when picked, the only wrong option is B. If you assume all 3 are correct you have a 75% chance of hitting a correct answer. Since 75% is not a option. Then you have a 0% chance of hitting the right answer. If you assume all are wrong the answer is still 0%. Therefore the question has no right answer within the provided ones.

The answer is C because you are not picking at random, but IF you were picking at random, you would have a 50% chance of hitting the right answer (25%). Key word is "IF".

@fireplacefairy I really like this because if viewed from my perspective it validates my previously held beliefs, even though if i was to assume something i thought of as objective it would be the opposite.

I really like this because it perfectly demonstrates how her real utility is logos and his is eros, even though the orientation they experientially live is the opposite

@2196F3 @Qivshi1 Yet the human brain does it without any effort.

@Qivshi1 A lora large enough yo remember name will erase the learned concepts everywhere else pretty quickly

The best way to do LLM memory would be through something like a big LORA that continuously updates weights eg to learn a person's name well, you have to move beyond a little note (how LLM memory is currently done) and just learn the association automatically (from the weights)

@andrewgwils Big Data. Machine Learning. Artificial Intelligence.

It's funny how phrases like "generative AI" and "big data" are an efficient way of signaling that you are not a domain expert.

@FilmLadd But imagine how cool it would be

The US Military ultimately determined that the "Rods from God" concept wouldn't work as initially imagined. All sorts of issues, but the primary one: it results in an energy release no more powerful than a conventional bomb.

@Joy678320811181 @Shiyanying @fchollet I am obviously so much better for not even expressing my opinion and just critiquing you

@adroptable @Shiyanying @fchollet Very high. Very mighty sir. Great debate. Way to really get to the heart of the issue and avoid getting caught in the weeds. Well done.

One of the biggest misconceptions people have about intelligence is seeing it as some kind of unbounded scalar stat, like height. "Future AI will have 10,000 IQ", that sort of thing. Intelligence is a conversion ratio, with an optimality bound. Increasing intelligence is not so much like "making the tower taller", it's more like "making the ball rounder". At some point it's already pretty damn spherical and any improvement is marginal. Now of course smart humans aren't quite at the optimal bound yet on an individual level, and machines will have many advantages besides intelligence -- mostly the removal of biological bottlenecks: greater processing speed, unlimited working memory, unlimited memory with perfect recall... but these are mostly things humans can also access through externalized cognitive tools.

You did not really have an objective point. You just made a bunch of statements. It's at the very best an opinion piece. You keep saying things with conviction as though you have some divine source of information. "everyone understood". I get it though. You disagree. No real meaning. Just pure conflict of belief. Same as OPs statement. Meaningless asspull. You are just easy to put down since you use concepts without understanding their meaning.

@adroptable @Shiyanying @fchollet I understand the point. But everyone understood my point also.

@redaction there might be some innacuracies due to the fact that the first graph uses adjusted dollars and the second one includes benefits

@redaction The data doesn't corroborate this unfortunately. ~ 50 % of people are in the first 2 points of the graph. While less than ~ 1 % are in the last 3.

Modernity is genius because it’s essentially a sorting algorithm where the losers viciously defend their own right to be sorted against In the absence of traditional guard rails, they are permitted to self-destruct openly, weeding themselves out of the gene pool

@menhguin @fchollet the question is : is there a complex problem one von neumann can't solve that more than one von neumann can solve? (excluding volume limits)

@fchollet no, i don't think this analogy makes sense. there's no specific reason why humans are anywhere near the theoretical optimality bound. there is no reason von neumann can't be the species average, and then another von-neumann level genius comes along in that population.

@Joy678320811181 @Shiyanying @fchollet IQ is the quotient of general intelligence - G. It is measured relative to a norm made of other people. You already used the term 500 IQ which implies that our tests are capable of capturing that intelligence. He just pointed out that that is not the correct test to use.

@Shiyanying @fchollet “We do not have a test for something therefore it cannot exist” brilliant.