This is the right definition. LLM outputs have undefined truth value. They’re mechanized Frankfurtian Bullshiters. Which can be valuable! If you have the tools or taste to filter the things that happen to be true from the rest of the dross.

However! We need a nicer word for it. Suggesting someone has “AI psychosis” feels a bit too impolitic.

Maybe we reclaim “toked out” from our misspent youths?

e.g. “This piece feels a little toked out. Let’s verify a few of Claude’s claims”

This cycle is hostile in lots of ways, but the trustworthiness and absence of hostility in this dimension is quite nice.

In particular, it's designed for the teletype era, when (a) the user would have a trace of all the commands they'd sent and output they'd received, since it was literally printed on paper, and (b) output was literally printed on paper, and so had a direct, non-negligible cost.

This is more or less exactly the situation LLMs find themselves in. they can attend to ~all the prior output in their context window, but there's a direct cost to adding new symbols to context.

We've got a tool for exactly that setting, so it would be fun to try it!

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_(text_editor)

What does one do when a full editor consumes too much bandwidth^H tokens? Use ed, the standard editor!

obviously $2.5e9ish/yr is substantial in absolute terms ... but that's it? They intermediate half the internet and only capture $7m/day?

Sent me to the shelf, but one has to appreciate the word choice. Evokes the peanut oil spilling everywhere, the reach for geologic terminology captures the lithic aspects of the peanut butter underneath.

The massive scale is all massively parallel: test-time compute for users, test time compute for RL rollouts (and probably increasingly environments for those rollouts), other synthetic data generation, research experiments, …

I feel the loss of this signal acutely. It’s an adjustment to react to 10-30 page “spec” choc-a-block with formatting and ascii figures as if it were a verbal spitball … because these days it likely is.

[1]: https://aws.amazon.com/bedrock/pricing/

> Users on annual Pro or Pro+ plans will remain on their existing plan with premium request-based pricing until their plan expires, however, model multipliers will increase on June 1 (see table).

When we had to add another core to keep up with Moore’s Law?

You're right that your broker will do all they can to avoid you shooting both you and them in the foot. But your agreement with your broker does not control your relationship with the counterparty to your futures contract. If the broker doesn't (or can't) close your position in time you('re both) on the hook.

It just happened today: https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/1siq4m2/any...