I've tried asking it factual information, and it asserts that it's incorrect but it will definitely hallucinate questions like the above.

You'd think the reasoning would nail that and most of the chain-of-thought systems I've worked on would have fixed this by asking it if the resulting answer was correct.

By caching them they resume from where it left off from before thereby completely bypassing all that computation.

For large contexts this could save a ton of compute!

I think this feature and structured outputs are some of the biggest inventions in LLMs this year.

I really really want to underscore this point.

You're literally standing on top of ground and under that is boiling water.

If that breaks and you fall in you're going to be in boiling water with no way to get out and you will die screaming.

Also NEVER walk on ground that has no vegetation. If you look around a geyser you will see that the ground is white and has no vegetation. That's because the temperature is too high and it has water under it that's heating the ground.

Walk on that and there's a chance you will fall in.

In the back country there are no fences so you can fall right through the crust.

Agreed on NATO + Ukraine too but I wish they would allow us to strike Russia directly even with NATO equipment.

Correct me if I'm wrong though.

IMO this leads to the following problems:

1. Most startups that COULD exist are never actually started because the founders want to be making higher salaries working at Google/Microsoft/Meta/etc.

2. The only founders that actually move forward are ones that have a significant amount of cash in the back from previous startups.

3. The founders and investors aren't properly aligned. The founders want to exit but the investors want them to go long so that they get their unicorn exit.

Now #3 is mitigated in some situations by having the founders do 'partial founder buyout' where they sell some of their equity into the next round for a few million dollars each.

But this is an admission that there's a problem.

It just seems like everyone would be better off if VCs would just get over it and put in more cash and allow their portfolio companies to pay more competitive salaries.

I know this is happening in the AI space right now with companies paying more to pick up top talent - so they don't go to work for MAANG.

This is inherently bad for startup employees and they are directly subsidizing profits for the VCs.

The VCs get to diversify but the startup employees don't.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40433266

Points: 44

# Comments: 71

A highly advanced AI could compress the text and predict the next sequences easily.

This seems like a direct connection like electricity and magnetism.

And maybe that's why English needs to be about 1 bit because we're not very intelligent.

The education bubble is about to implode - it will probably be one of the first industries killed by AI.

It's like asking a 747 to be made into a dog.

It's completely nonsensical to me.

Let the market develop organically.

But... I had just a MASSIVE amount of code that was literally just for me.

Emacs basically became my OS.

Emacs allowed you to just eval code on the fly and the IDE would just adapt. No reload required. So if you wanted to do stupid stuff like make control+enter open the current URL at the cursor, you just write a three line script. Then you add it to your elisp on load.

... but mine got WAY out of hand. It was just mountains of code.