Shit! They found me! crawls away
Shit! They found me! crawls away
Rebranding a Markov Chain stapled onto a particularly large graph
Could you elaborate how this applies to various areas of AI in your opinion?
Several models are non-markovian. Then there are also a lot of models and algorithms, where the description as or even comparison to Markov-chains would be incorrect and not suitable.
The level of your argumentation:
Are you a firefighter or a medical doctor? If not, you’re obviously in favour of fires, death and disease.
Why aren’t you donating all of your stuff to homeless people? Or are you happy all those people don’t have a home?
Why aren’t you saving the world already???
You know, demanding change and maybe showing some sort of protest does not mean you need to do those things exactly as you would like to see them, especially if those efforts wouldn’t change anything on the larger scale and rather lead to a bunch of problems in your life.
Why do they get attacked though?
Edit: got time to read he article:
Many of the assaults are caused by the shortage of hospital staff and family members’ frustration at the resulting long waiting times for surgery and consultations.
According to the doctors’ union ANAAO, until 2022 almost half of positions in emergency medicine were vacant. Salary-cap legislation over the past two decades to curb public spending has kept salaries low, and work schedules are punishing. For many Italian medical staff, the Covid pandemic was the tipping point, accelerating an exodus abroad. Spending plans published by Giorgia Meloni’s government envisage further healthcare cuts.
In 2023, according to the Forum delle Società Scientifiche dei Clinici Ospedalieri e Universitari Italiani, there was a shortage of approximately 30,000 doctors in Italy. Between 2010 and 2020, 111 hospitals and 113 emergency rooms closed.
Yeah, sounds totally reasonable to put soldiers in hospitals in order to solve these problems. /s smh
“Funding aggression”. Lol. No wonder Germany got fucked in the ass by Russia and China so many times with such bootlickers among the voting population.
2024 - 22 = 2002.
So probably not nazis. No.
Where is the “mah freedum” and “they are taking away our democracy” crowd now?
I wonder how you’re breathing. /j
I am too lazy to read the report rn, is there anything about the reasons for why that is?
I feel this. Fell into a similar rabbit hole when I tried to get realtime feedback on the program’s own memory usage, discerning stuff like reserved and actually used virtual memory. Felt like black magic and was ultimately not doable within the expected time constraints without touching the kernel I suppose. Spent too much time on that and had to move on with no other solution than to measure/compute the allocated memory of the largest payload data types.
Where do you get this attitude that everything should be provided to you for free and you’re entitled to it?
From (non-capitalistic) utopic ideas, where humans try to be excellent to each other.
And on the flip side, when you’re not spending much money, you’re being accused of ruining the economy. Especially if you like avocados.
My point is, that the following statement is not entirely correct:
When AI systems ingest copyrighted works, they’re extracting general patterns and concepts […] not copying specific text or images.
One obvious flaw in that sentence is the general statement about AI systems. There are huge differences between different realms of AI. Failing to address those by at least mentioning that briefly, disqualifies the author regarding factual correctness. For example, there are a plethora of non-generative AIs, meaning those, not generating texts, audio or images/videos, but merely operating as a classifier or clustering algorithm for instance, which are - without further modifications - not intended to replicate data similar to its inputs but rather provide insights.
However, I can overlook this as the author might have just not thought about that in the very moment of writing.
Next:
While it is true that transformer models like ChatGPT try to learn patterns, the most likely token for the next possible output in a sequence of contextually coherent data, given the right context it is not unlikely that it may reproduce its training data nearly or even completely identically as I’ve demonstrated before. The less data is available for a specific context to generalise from, the more likely it becomes that the model just replicates its training data. This is in principle fine because this is what such models are designed to do: draw the best possible conclusions from the available data to predict the next output in a sequence. (That’s one of the reasons why they need such an insane amount of data to be trained on.)
This can ultimately lead to occurences of indeed “copying specific texts or images”.
but the fact that you prompted the system to do it seems to kind of dilute this point a bit
It doesn’t matter whether I directly prompted it for it. I set the correct context to achieve this kind of behaviour, because context matters most for transformer models. Directly prompting it do do that was just an easy way of setting the required context. I’ve occasionally observed ChatGPT replicating identical sentences from some (copyright-protected) scientific literature when I used it to get an overview over some specific topic and also had books or papers about that on hand. The latter demonstrates again that transformers become more likely to replicate training data the more “specific” a context becomes, i.e., having significantly less training data available for that context than about others.
When AI systems ingest copyrighted works, they’re extracting general patterns and concepts - the “Bob Dylan-ness” or “Hemingway-ness” - not copying specific text or images.
Okay.
The triangle in the background sky is Pascal’s triangle.
Removed by mod
*Björn
It never left.
If someone comes to seek asylum in a country foreign to that one or wants to build a life there, but so willingly disregards its laws, they have overstayed their welcome.
However, that does not mean that deporting them back to where they came from is necessarily better in case torture, death or similar things await them there. In that case they could be killed, tortured, whatever right on the spot as the outcome will be the same. No need to fly them out then. There is blood on one’s hand either way and therefore not a solution I would deem meaningful.
I’m more with you regarding Israel. However, the context here is China, not Israel.
Wtf. You know it’s 2024, right? Nazi Germany is no more (unless AfD and consorts form the new government).
I was not talking about WW2-times.