A provocative aside in bad faith, anyway a completely minor point within the overall post, which some of the people he's telling to fuck off might have read
Good post. I guess the transistor has been in play for not even one century, and in any case singularities are everywhere, so who cares? The topic is grandiose and fun to speculate about, but many of the real issues relate to banal media culture and demographic health.
Will or should? It's plausible, this same argument was made in an article the other day, but basic type/static analysis tools are cheap with enormous payoff and even those methods aren't ubiquitous.
Yes. But from their paper: “In our analysis, we present compelling empirical evidence for the existence of universal subspaces
within LoRA adapters across different modalities and tasks.”
I also don’t understand what they write under figure 2, since resnet50 has 50 layers, not 31.
Well that's stupid. I submit though, connecting stochastic process directly to shell you do give permission for everything that results. It's a stupid game. Gemini mixes up LEFT and RIGHT (!). You have to check it.
I would submit once you obtain a certain level of experience it becomes IDEAL to begin with implementation, in case a mathematical analysis may be either trivial or impossibly non-trivial... Of course if you're dealing in exchange rates and risk management, understand the math!
The output distribution is altered - it starts responding "yes" 20% of the time - and then, conditional on that is more or less steered by the "concept" vector?
You're asking it if it can feel the presence of an unusual thought. If it works, it's obviously not going to say the exact same thing it would have said without the question. That's not what is meant by 'alteration'.
It doesn't matter if it's 'altered' if the alteration doesn't point to the concept in question. It doesn't start spitting out content that will allow you to deduce the concept from the output alone. That's all that matters.
They ask a yes/no question and inject data into the state. It goes yes (20%). The prompt does not reveal the concept as of yet, of course. The injected activations, in addition to the prompt, steer the rest of the response. SOMETIMES it SOUNDED LIKE introspection. Other times it sounded like physical sensory experience, which is only more clearly errant since the thing has no senses.
I think this technique is going to be valuable for controlling the output distribution, but I don't find their "introspection" framing helpful to understanding.
Either life really is extremely rare (most likely), or intelligent life is, or it isn't actually trivial/correct to destroy alien planets. If the galaxy were actually like that we would have been toast a long time ago. In reality dark forest is a generate thesis since it implies we're alone, so no aliens anyway.
We really don't know much about the universe and it is too vast and unfathomed. Scientists computed the mass of all matter and all energy of this Universe, but their calculations told that all this stuff comprises merely 5% of the Universe, the remaining 95% of the Universe is said to made of anti-matter and anti-energy, about which not much is understood.
So there's a good chance that aliens may be made of anti-matter and using anti-energy. But even if they tried to communicated with rest of universe with such anti-energy-based technology, we humans simply may not be detecting it or interpreting it yet, and we may still be waiting for that elusive signal (energy-based) indicating advanced intelligent life.
Nope, not "anti-". The 5% are visible "bright" mass and energy. "Bright" meaning that we can see it through telescopes, by various wavelengths of light, particle emissions, gravity waves. The rest is "dark matter" and "dark energy", which just means that we see signs of it being there, because the bright matter around it behaves differently. But we don't directly see it in a telescope of any kind. Those "dark" things are stand-ins for our not understanding: Those could be real matter and energy that we just cannot see for some reason. Or those could be problems in our cosmological theories, like gravity working differently on large scales, the expansion of the universe being different, or physical constants changing over time. We just notice that things are off and that we should see more matter and more energy than we do.
Most theories that involve "dark matter" being ordinary matter like tons of neutron stars, huge clouds of dust, bazillions of asteroids or dark planets have been checked for and excluded. So if there were "dark matter" aliens, they really would be completely strange in that they aren't even made from the same kind of matter, but from maybe particles that we don't even know about. But if those hypothetical dark matter particles were capable of this kind of organisation, like clumping together into stars or planets, we would have probably seen those by now. So extremely strange, and improbable imho.
Btw. anti-matter is not "dark matter" in this sense, and dark matter being anti-matter was excluded very very early on by a simple observation: anti-matter and matter, when they come into contact, react in an annihilation reaction. E.g. an electron and anti-electron annihilate into two photons of a characteristic and exact 511keV energy. All other particles and their anti-particles also do this and exhibit their own characteristic energy. Any contact between a region of matter and region of anti-matter in space would radiate in these energy signatures, something which is very easy to detect. Dark matter is known to exist within galaxies, even within star systems, so this kind of contact zone would have to be there, and would be extremely visible to us.
Anti-energy doesn't exist in our current understanding of physics. Energy is always positive, and in quantum theories energy cannot even become zero, always slightly above zero.
reply