Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. Only the best and brightest are working for Anthropic.

Only the best and brightest are working for Anthropic.

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
claude
59 Indlæg 30 Posters 0 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • joshg@mathstodon.xyzJ joshg@mathstodon.xyz

    @Mabande
    You don't get a PhD without rigor.

    We don't need to attack a philosopher's credentials or skill here. The problem isn't the philosophy, it's the engineers who are providing inaccurate technical explanations to the philosopher. This is why we need to infuse the humanities into our engineering programs - we need technical philosophers to call this bullshit out.

    (And we have them - see the DAIR group, for example.)
    @adardis

    mabande@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
    mabande@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
    mabande@mastodon.social
    wrote on sidst redigeret af
    #20

    @joshg I opposed @adardis's use of "_very_ rigorous" as some kind of credential for Askell's skills as a philosopher.
    Yes, rigor is needed for getting a PhD. But. It does not guarantee that someone has understood their field: one seldom cited thesis re. ethics doesn't necessarily mean she is qualified to define life/consciousness.
    (as paralleled by the unfortunate number of PhD's who are proponents of eugenics)

    Especially as she's a follower of "effective altruism".

    And yes, DAIR are _on_ it.

    joshg@mathstodon.xyzJ 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • aspragg@ohai.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
      aspragg@ohai.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
      aspragg@ohai.social
      wrote on sidst redigeret af
      #21

      @Bender @adardis @Mabande And a few others too

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_disease

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • mabande@mastodon.socialM mabande@mastodon.social

        @joshg I opposed @adardis's use of "_very_ rigorous" as some kind of credential for Askell's skills as a philosopher.
        Yes, rigor is needed for getting a PhD. But. It does not guarantee that someone has understood their field: one seldom cited thesis re. ethics doesn't necessarily mean she is qualified to define life/consciousness.
        (as paralleled by the unfortunate number of PhD's who are proponents of eugenics)

        Especially as she's a follower of "effective altruism".

        And yes, DAIR are _on_ it.

        joshg@mathstodon.xyzJ This user is from outside of this forum
        joshg@mathstodon.xyzJ This user is from outside of this forum
        joshg@mathstodon.xyz
        wrote on sidst redigeret af
        #22

        @Mabande
        oof. yeah if she's an "effective altruism" follower, that's a lack of something all right.

        amazing how someone can be incredibly thorough in justifying something so obviously horrible.
        @adardis

        fgbjr@indieweb.socialF 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • mabande@mastodon.socialM mabande@mastodon.social

          Only the best and brightest are working for Anthropic.

          #Claude #AI

          skua@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
          skua@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
          skua@mastodon.social
          wrote on sidst redigeret af
          #23

          @Mabande

          Faeces were cleaned off a light switch this morning.

          The combination of a unique microbiome, the still live binary switch and the macro "Schrodinger's Cat"-like possibility of a quantum event deciding whether the cleaning liquid provided a pathway to earth through the cleaner does, I feel, amount to an entirely new entity having been formed.

          How are we to understand how that entity felt about being destroyed?

          Pro tip: Better genAI prompts if you don't wash after wiping.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • rubinjoni@mastodon.socialR rubinjoni@mastodon.social

            @CAWguy @Mabande @Kierkegaanks Shitposters, but not very good ones.

            davidgerard@circumstances.runD This user is from outside of this forum
            davidgerard@circumstances.runD This user is from outside of this forum
            davidgerard@circumstances.run
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #24

            @rubinjoni @CAWguy @Mabande @Kierkegaanks@beige.party shit posters

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • joshg@mathstodon.xyzJ joshg@mathstodon.xyz

              @Mabande
              oof. yeah if she's an "effective altruism" follower, that's a lack of something all right.

              amazing how someone can be incredibly thorough in justifying something so obviously horrible.
              @adardis

              fgbjr@indieweb.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
              fgbjr@indieweb.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
              fgbjr@indieweb.social
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #25

              @joshg @Mabande @adardis Philosophers can be wrong about things and still be philosophers.

              dpnash@c.imD 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • koantig@mamot.frK This user is from outside of this forum
                koantig@mamot.frK This user is from outside of this forum
                koantig@mamot.fr
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #26

                @Mabande OMG, thank you! I thought I'd never find this tweet again!
                Properly archived this time.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • rollspelosofen@mastodon.nuR rollspelosofen@mastodon.nu

                  @Mabande It’s a logical reasoning model with polite UI. That’s neither a human or a machine. It’s a software solution

                  marjolica@social.linux.pizzaM This user is from outside of this forum
                  marjolica@social.linux.pizzaM This user is from outside of this forum
                  marjolica@social.linux.pizza
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #27

                  @rollspelosofen @Mabande I'm sorry I have to differ.
                  LLMs don't reason.
                  And there a difference between obsequiousness and being polite.

                  rollspelosofen@mastodon.nuR 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • mabande@mastodon.socialM mabande@mastodon.social

                    Only the best and brightest are working for Anthropic.

                    #Claude #AI

                    illuminatus@mstdn.socialI This user is from outside of this forum
                    illuminatus@mstdn.socialI This user is from outside of this forum
                    illuminatus@mstdn.social
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #28

                    @Mabande Whenever I read this, I have to seriously reconsider if Mao's idea of sending the youth to the country to learn the life of the peasants was so wrong…

                    mabande@mastodon.socialM 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • mabande@mastodon.socialM mabande@mastodon.social

                      Only the best and brightest are working for Anthropic.

                      #Claude #AI

                      zhksh@sigmoid.socialZ This user is from outside of this forum
                      zhksh@sigmoid.socialZ This user is from outside of this forum
                      zhksh@sigmoid.social
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #29

                      @Mabande Avery def should one of them

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • petealexharris@mastodon.scotP petealexharris@mastodon.scot

                        @adardis @Mabande

                        My instinct says it's very hard to get paid from a philosophy degree.

                        celesteh@hachyderm.ioC This user is from outside of this forum
                        celesteh@hachyderm.ioC This user is from outside of this forum
                        celesteh@hachyderm.io
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #30

                        @petealexharris @adardis @Mabande

                        People with philosophy undergraduate degrees have very high mid career income, but the more advanced the degree, the lower the income gets (this is also true for music). The reason is that most don't work as philophers.

                        If somebody is offering super high wages to somebody not already famous, that should be a clue that something is amiss. But, I mean, who *wants* to see the problem.

                        (Nobody ever uses composers for evil, so its very easy for me to say all of this, with my music PhD.)

                        petealexharris@mastodon.scotP timotimo@peoplemaking.gamesT 2 Replies Last reply
                        0
                        • mabande@mastodon.socialM mabande@mastodon.social

                          Only the best and brightest are working for Anthropic.

                          #Claude #AI

                          float13@masto.hackers.townF This user is from outside of this forum
                          float13@masto.hackers.townF This user is from outside of this forum
                          float13@masto.hackers.town
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #31

                          @Mabande

                          Mel Brooks, as usual, was way ahead of us...

                          https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wvEyDRsr2Gs

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • celesteh@hachyderm.ioC celesteh@hachyderm.io

                            @petealexharris @adardis @Mabande

                            People with philosophy undergraduate degrees have very high mid career income, but the more advanced the degree, the lower the income gets (this is also true for music). The reason is that most don't work as philophers.

                            If somebody is offering super high wages to somebody not already famous, that should be a clue that something is amiss. But, I mean, who *wants* to see the problem.

                            (Nobody ever uses composers for evil, so its very easy for me to say all of this, with my music PhD.)

                            petealexharris@mastodon.scotP This user is from outside of this forum
                            petealexharris@mastodon.scotP This user is from outside of this forum
                            petealexharris@mastodon.scot
                            wrote sidst redigeret af
                            #32

                            @celesteh @adardis @Mabande

                            If it looked like there was more money in using composers for evil, you can be sure they would Find A Way.

                            mabande@mastodon.socialM 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • joshg@mathstodon.xyzJ joshg@mathstodon.xyz

                              @Mabande
                              You don't get a PhD without rigor.

                              We don't need to attack a philosopher's credentials or skill here. The problem isn't the philosophy, it's the engineers who are providing inaccurate technical explanations to the philosopher. This is why we need to infuse the humanities into our engineering programs - we need technical philosophers to call this bullshit out.

                              (And we have them - see the DAIR group, for example.)
                              @adardis

                              joshg@mathstodon.xyzJ This user is from outside of this forum
                              joshg@mathstodon.xyzJ This user is from outside of this forum
                              joshg@mathstodon.xyz
                              wrote sidst redigeret af
                              #33

                              @Mabande
                              since this thread is making the rounds again, y'all who read this far get a link to my own amateur-but-carefully-thought-through math and philosophy on why Anthropic and others are provably full of shit: https://thoughtlost.org/nosingularity/

                              @adardis

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • marjolica@social.linux.pizzaM marjolica@social.linux.pizza

                                @rollspelosofen @Mabande I'm sorry I have to differ.
                                LLMs don't reason.
                                And there a difference between obsequiousness and being polite.

                                rollspelosofen@mastodon.nuR This user is from outside of this forum
                                rollspelosofen@mastodon.nuR This user is from outside of this forum
                                rollspelosofen@mastodon.nu
                                wrote sidst redigeret af
                                #34

                                @marjolica @Mabande By ”logical reasoning” I was referring to the common ”if… else…” reasoning statements that all modern software use. And I was using polite very broadly here. 🙂

                                marjolica@social.linux.pizzaM 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • petealexharris@mastodon.scotP petealexharris@mastodon.scot

                                  @celesteh @adardis @Mabande

                                  If it looked like there was more money in using composers for evil, you can be sure they would Find A Way.

                                  mabande@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                  mabande@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                  mabande@mastodon.social
                                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                                  #35

                                  @petealexharris @celesteh @adardis The IRL Darth Vader wannabe got to have his cool soundtrack...

                                  celesteh@hachyderm.ioC 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • rollspelosofen@mastodon.nuR rollspelosofen@mastodon.nu

                                    @marjolica @Mabande By ”logical reasoning” I was referring to the common ”if… else…” reasoning statements that all modern software use. And I was using polite very broadly here. 🙂

                                    marjolica@social.linux.pizzaM This user is from outside of this forum
                                    marjolica@social.linux.pizzaM This user is from outside of this forum
                                    marjolica@social.linux.pizza
                                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                                    #36

                                    @rollspelosofen @Mabande I don't think LLMs use if .. else logic, though decision trees are a different form of AI and largely work that way (I've written them myself in the past).
                                    LLMs just include a whole set of statements in parallel, including your prompt, their billions of weights based on data they were trained on and imperative guard rails and meta instructions set by their trainers. Of course as a stochastic parrot they don't always even prioritise their guard rails and often let information in their training data override what you tell them to do in the prompt.

                                    rollspelosofen@mastodon.nuR 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • celesteh@hachyderm.ioC celesteh@hachyderm.io

                                      @petealexharris @adardis @Mabande

                                      People with philosophy undergraduate degrees have very high mid career income, but the more advanced the degree, the lower the income gets (this is also true for music). The reason is that most don't work as philophers.

                                      If somebody is offering super high wages to somebody not already famous, that should be a clue that something is amiss. But, I mean, who *wants* to see the problem.

                                      (Nobody ever uses composers for evil, so its very easy for me to say all of this, with my music PhD.)

                                      timotimo@peoplemaking.gamesT This user is from outside of this forum
                                      timotimo@peoplemaking.gamesT This user is from outside of this forum
                                      timotimo@peoplemaking.games
                                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                                      #37

                                      @celesteh @petealexharris @adardis @Mabande smash cut to the composer who was horrified to find out that his cheerful tunes were being used for torture …

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • marjolica@social.linux.pizzaM marjolica@social.linux.pizza

                                        @rollspelosofen @Mabande I don't think LLMs use if .. else logic, though decision trees are a different form of AI and largely work that way (I've written them myself in the past).
                                        LLMs just include a whole set of statements in parallel, including your prompt, their billions of weights based on data they were trained on and imperative guard rails and meta instructions set by their trainers. Of course as a stochastic parrot they don't always even prioritise their guard rails and often let information in their training data override what you tell them to do in the prompt.

                                        rollspelosofen@mastodon.nuR This user is from outside of this forum
                                        rollspelosofen@mastodon.nuR This user is from outside of this forum
                                        rollspelosofen@mastodon.nu
                                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                                        #38

                                        @marjolica @Mabande Okay. 👍

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • adardis@mstdn.socialA adardis@mstdn.social

                                          @Mabande Have a look at her Wikipedia page. If it's accurate, she's a very rigorous philosopher.

                                          I'm tempted to say "no bullshit there" but it's possible to be rigorous and to spout bullshit.

                                          My instinct says she has/they have other reasons for saying the things they do.

                                          adx@infosec.exchangeA This user is from outside of this forum
                                          adx@infosec.exchangeA This user is from outside of this forum
                                          adx@infosec.exchange
                                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                                          #39

                                          @adardis @Mabande A lot of very smart people are wrong about a lot of stuff even especially within their field. After a certain people you get high on your own stash.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Svar
                                          • Svar som emne
                                          Login for at svare
                                          • Ældste til nyeste
                                          • Nyeste til ældste
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Log ind

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          Graciously hosted by data.coop
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Hjem
                                          • Seneste
                                          • Etiketter
                                          • Populære
                                          • Verden
                                          • Bruger
                                          • Grupper