I had a client train an AI on images I created without extended usage and so added adversarial noise to the images next time around. The models I tested with misclassified the images and image generation seemed broken, so Im curious how it impacted their attempts, if they even attempted it again, I don't know. I don't expect them to come to me and ask why their model is so interested in ducks...
Companies put measures into place to make sure that their software only functions correctly with a paying customer. Some Video Games include intentional problem when the game believes IP laws are violated.
This was the attack vector of a AI CTF hosted by Microsoft last year. I built an agent to assess, structure, and perform the attacks autonomously and found that even with some common guardrails in place the system was vulnerable to data exfiltration. My agent was able to successfully complete 18 of the challenges... Here is the write up after the finals.
I have been building a "realistic" but simplified 2D universe simulator since GPT3.5 was first introduced, it has slowly grown to become a 1000loc Python file that uses Pygame. I think it represents a good mix of what might appear in training as code examples and physics understanding. Aside from occasionally "playing" the game, its a zero-player game... I mainly use it to test new models. Can the model handle 1000 lines of complex physics code? Can the model make improvements to areas that I already know are poorly optimized or incorrect?
"X and Y were in the garden, Y noticed the ripe tomatoes as they went into the greenhouse". Is X in the greenhouse?
I'm way woker than the average person but I have to admit encountering a singular 'they' breaks my concentration in a distracting way - there's definitely possible ambiguity.
People really ought to read redacted documents to get an idea for how people write with clarity when gender and even number of parties is unknown.
But I'm confused by your sentence regardless of the gender terms. Did they notice the tomatoes in the Garden or in the greenhouse? This is just ambiguous wording in general.
- These are two different sentences, but they're separated with a comma. It should be a period, as it makes no grammatical sense with a comma unless you're trying to make it intentionally confusing.
- You would write "They both went into the greenhouse" if they both entered, or you would write "Y entered the greenhouse and noticed the ripe tomatoes."
- "Before entering the greenhouse, "Y"/"they both" noticed the ripe tomatoes in the Garden."
Kerouac and Burroughs are objectively awful. I still think that Kerouac's popularity as a writer was an industry practical joke. Speaking of both skill and content. A People's History used to be an AP History book, so appropriate for very mature kids with teaching support but the books is in a different category. Assuming that the Mensa list is pretty much just an exposure of standard prep school English literature list to the masses, albeit uncurated so as to make it difficult to use. There's too much promotion of substance abuse in Thompson books to qualify them as appropriate for kids, even if the books are otherwise good. Usually high schools aren't in the business of radicalizing students with Chomsky as well as other very political books. Kids can pick that up in college and beyond.
In general, these books are categorically different. The provided list isn't missing them. They'd just be on a different list.
Infinite jest is a bad book. No, I will not read your fking calculus page alongside the other 1000+ pages of nonsense. The idea of assigning it even to mensa kids is exactly why Mensa has such a poor reputation. Mensa famously has the reputation of its members being extremely autistic. Books like this all but guarantee it if they are read by young, impressionable minds.
Ulysses is only good because Joyce was a coomer.
Candide is actually good and more people need to read it.
The others you listed are post modern neo Marxism or drug abusers which will teach your kids to hate your teacher and the whole idea of education. Why not just throw on “pedagogy of the oppressed” to put the final nail into the coffin of your kid giving a fk about what your teacher teaches (“sorry, I’m not doing your homework you colonizer shitlord, I refuse to participate in the banking model of education”.
"The data showed significant differences in the oxygen uptake (a way to measure the energy cost of running) in the Vaporfly shoe resulting in a 2.8 percent improved running economy, or the amount of energy it takes a runner to go a certain distance, over the Adidas shoe on average"
But not every runner sees improvement in time. so-called non-responders exist at the elite level but I don't recall seeing any analysis as to why some runners run faster and others don't with these carbon-plate shoes.
Also the significant benefits that comes from improved post-run recovery with modern super shoes, allowing athletes to run significantly more weekly mileage.
Not vibrams, but please have a closeer look at those olypians shoes. These are very lightweight and most important _flat_ shoes, encouraging a natural running pose.
reply