huginn

You'll probably save money in the long run using a pi.

Also: :: in Java is method reference. In Kotlin it's reflection.

I'd say if you care a lot about distinguishing contexts it's really the job of the IDE to highlight syntax.

Don't write code as though you're going to read it in plain text imo.

1. Emergence is the whole being greater than the sum of its parts. That's the original meaning of emergent properties, which is laid out in the first paragraph of the article. It's the scholarly usage as well, and what the claims of observed emergence are using as the base of their claim.

2. The article very explicitly demonstrated that only about 10% of any of the measures for LLMs displayed any emergence and that illusory emergence was the result of overly rigid metrics. Swapping to edit distance as an approximately close metric causes the sharp spikes to disappear for obvious reasons: no longer having a sharp yes/no allows for linear progression to reappear. It was always there, merely masked by flawed statistics.

If you can't be bothered to read here's a very easy to understand video by one of the authors: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypKwNrmuuPM

Here's a white paper explicitly proving:

No emergent properties (illusory due to bad measures)

Predictable linear progress with model size

https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.15004

The field changes fast, I understand it is hard to keep up

Their paper uses industry standard definitions

Here's a white paper explicitly proving:

1. No emergent properties (illusory due to bad measures)
2. Predictable linear progress with model size

https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.15004

The field changes fast, I understand it is hard to keep up

Sure thing: here's a white paper explicitly proving:

1. No emergent properties (illusory due to bad measures)
2. Predictable linear progress with model size

https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.15004

Unless you want to call your predictive text on your keyboard a mind you really can't call an LLM a mind. It is nothing more than a linear progression from that. Mathematically proven to not show any form of emergent behavior.

Well there are 2 options:

Either I'm a real mind separate and independent of you or I'm a figment of your imagination.

At which point you have to ask yourself: why are you so convinced you're an unlovable and insufferable twat?

Friendly reminder that your predictive text, while very compelling, is not alive.

It's not a mind.

Probably MVP, but it's a US awards show. It won't include EU exclusive phones obviously.

Yes but the heat it retains in that time is 85x the effect of base CO2, which makes sense: decomposition of the methane releases energy. It does a much better job of reflecting the IR until it breaks down, then in the act of breaking down releases energy.