Which means your heating bill will explode. Right now gas in America is easier to sell to Americans. But liquidized gas will change that.
At least this will mean that opec won't be able to strangle lng in its crib, which their relatively low prices had been trying to do.
We want the LLM to learn the multiplication algorithm not an incomplete set of tables. The algorithm might be smaller and will be more complete.
Honestly, our technology has outpaced our epistemology. So we don't really know what a fact is or isn't. Are facts what we call our supervised learning experiences? You think the sun rises, no the earth spins. Your belief that the sun rises helps you predict sunset and sunrise. Your belief would be quaint to someone born and raised on a space station. Apollos chariot moves the sun across the sky doesn't it?
There is the logical system that turns prolog into SQL. Something like this might be useful for nuero symbolic computing. Graph languages like cypher seem a lot more limited.
Right; but since Erlang is already concurrency-oriented i was thinking it might be easier to add the GPU model to its runtime. See my other comment here - https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=45843523
The founders of the hypothetical terrorist vegan organization called "Blow Up Meat Packing Plants and Everyone Inside" has a lot to like about your proposal.
How do you see the incentives playing out in your multi-round game-theory battle for information control?
If it's wrong about something that 95+ percent of people are wrong about, that's mildly annoying but understandable.
If it picks sides on something that half of people are wrong about, that's less understandable of an error. Even if by chance it happens to pick the side that I know is right.
But then you let yourself get held hostage. Say NO now, while you can.
Suppose that circumcision becomes more contentious and the pro lobby and the con lobby both start sending you legalase and angry letters from politicians.
If you can say "we welcome your contributions to the internet corpus, and that's it" then you are maximally free. If you welcome their contributions to the SYSTEM_PROMPT then your future movements get increasingly restricted, well past the point of performance degradation.
Then you are fighting for your rights to run to run your product at all, rather than as mouth piece for some non-paying customer.
Let's ask the robots what they think about how we should regulate robots.
This will be useful feedback to determine whether humans actually should or should not. Maybe they can even tile the internet with a manufactured consensus that we just gradually accept as not just as correct, but actually the only opinion possible.
I assume the poster is referencing Citizens United v. FEC, specifically about the government's use of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act to restrict showing of political documentaries (apparently, called "Hillary: The Movie" and "Celsius 41.11").
While (as far as I know) the law was never actually used to ban books (only documentaries), the case became infamous because the government argued that it had the right to ban books if it wanted to. See, e.g., the NYTimes article below: "The [government's] lawyer, Malcolm L. Stewart, said Congress has the power to ban political books, signs and Internet videos, if they are paid for by corporations and distributed not long before an election.".
Yeah I made a mistake. There were a couple of films the FEC went after and they claimed the power extended to books as you pointed out. I was under-caffienated.
