All of Martin Vlach's Comments + Replies

Snapshot of a local(=Czech) discussion detailing motivations and decision paths of GAI actors, mainly the big developers:

Contributor A, initial points:

For those not closely following AI progress, two key observations:

1. Public Models vs. True Capability: Publicly accessible AI models will become increasingly poor indicators of the actual state-of-the-art in AI. Competitive AI labs will likely prioritize using their most advanced models internally to accelerate their own research and gain a dominant position, rather than releasing these top models for potentia

hopefully you will learn 

seems missing part 2.

??

Yeah, I've met the concept during my studies and was rather teasing for getting a great popular, easy to grasp, explanation which would also fit the definition.

It's not easy to find a fitting visual analogy TBH, which I'd find generally useful as I hold the concept to enhance general thinking.

No matter how I stretch or compress the digit 0, I can never achieve the two loops that are present in the digit 8.

0 when it's deformed by left and right pressure so that the sides meet seems to contradict?

Comparing to Gemma1, classic BigTech😅

And I seem to miss info on the effective context length..?

read spent the time to read

typo?

AI development risks are existential(/crucial/critical).—Does this statement quality for Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?

Counterargument stands on the sampling of analogous (breakthrough )intentions, some people call those *priors* here. Which inventions do we allow in here would strongly decide if the initial claim is extraordinary or just plain and reasonable, well fit in the dangerously powerful inventions*. 

My set of analogies: nuclear energy extraction; fire; shooting; speech/writing;;

Other set: Nuclear power, bio-engineering/... (read more)

Does it really work on RULER( benchmark from Nvidia)?
Not sure where but saw some controversies, https://arxiv.org/html/2410.18745v1#S1 is best I did find now...

Edit: Aah, this was what I had on mind: https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1io3hn2/nolima_longcontext_evaluation_beyond_literal/ 

I'd vote to remove the AI capabilities here, although I've not read the article yet, just roughly grasped the topic.

It's likely not about expanding the currently existing capabilities or something like that.

Oh, I did not know, thanks.
https://huggingface.co/spaces/deepseek-ai/Janus-Pro-7B seems to show DS is still merely clueless in the visual domain, at least IMO they are loosing there to Qwen and many others.

draft:
Can we theoretically quantify the representational capacity of a Transformer (or other neural network architecture) in terms of the "number of functions" it can ingest&embody?

• We're interested in the space of functions a Transformer can represent.
• Finite Input/Output Spaces: In practice, LLMs operate on finite-length sequences of tokens from a finite vocabulary. So, we're dealing with functions that map from a finite (though astronomically large) input space to a finite output space.

Counting Functions (Upper Bound)

• The Astronomical Number: Let's say

link to https://www.alignmentforum.org/users/ryan_greenblatt seems malformed, - instead of _, that is.

Locations:

High-Flyer Quant (幻方量化)

Headquarters: Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China 

High-Flyer Quant was founded in Hangzhou and maintains its headquarters there.   

Hangzhou is a major hub for technology and finance in China, making it a strategic location for a quant fund leveraging AI.   

Additional Offices: Hong Kong, China

DeepSeek (深度求索)

Headquarters: Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China 

DeepSeek, spun off from High-Flyer Quant in 2023, is headquartered in Hangzhou.   

Additional Offices: Beijing, China

This seems to state the opposite: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/JTKaR5q59BgDp6rH8/a-high-level-closed-door-session-discussing-deepseek-vision#:~:text=we%20hardly%20see%20the%20benefit%20of%20multimodal%20data.%20In%20other%20words%2C%20the%20cost%20is%20too%20high.%20Today%20there%20is%20no%20evidence%20it%20is%20useful.%20In%20the%20future%2C%20opportunities%20may%20be%20bigger.

Exploring the levels of sentience and moral obligations towards AI systems is such a nerd snipe and vortex for mental proceeding!

We did one of the largest-scale reductive thinking when we ascribed moral concern to people+property( of any/each of the people). That brought a load of problems associated with this simplistic ignorance and on of those are xRisks of high-tech property/production.

> Mathematics cannot be divorced from contemplation of its own structure.

..that would proof the labelers of pure maths as "mental masturbation" terribly wrong...

My suspicion: https://arxiv.org/html/2411.16489v1 taken and implemented on the small coding model.

Is it any mystery which of the DPO, PPO, RLHF, Fine tuning was likely the method for the advanced distillation there?

EA is neglecting industrial solutions to the industrial problem of successionism.

..because the broader mass of active actors working on such solutions renders the biz areas non-neglected?

Wow, such a badly argued( aka BS) while heavily up-voted article!

Let's start with the Myth #1, what a straw-man! Rather than this extreme statement, most researchers likely believe that in the current environment their safety&alignment advances are likely( with high EV) helpful to humanity. The thing here is they had quite a free hand or at least varied options to pick the environment where they work and publish.

With your examples a bad actor could see a worthy EV even with a capable system that is less obedient and more false. Even if interpretabilty ... (read more)

Are you referring to a Science of Technological Progress ala https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/07/we-need-new-science-progress/594946 ? 

What is your gist on the processes for humanizing technologies, what sources/researches are available on such phenomena?

some OpenAI board members who the Office of National AI Strategy was allowed to appoint, and they did in fact try to fire Sam Altman over the UAE move, but somehow a week later Sam was running the Multinational Artificial Narrow Intelligence Alignment Consortium, which sort of morphed into OpenAI's oversight body, which sort of morphed into OpenAI's parent company, and, well, you can guess who was running that.

pretty sassy abbreviations spiced in there.'Đ

I've expected the hint of
> My name is Anthony. What would you like to ask?
to show it Anthony was an LLM-based android, but who knows.?.

I mean your article, Anthropic's work seems more like a paper. Maybe without the ": S" it would make more sense as the reference and not a title: subtitle notion.

I have not read your explainer yet, but I've noted the title Toy Models of Superposition: Simplified by Hand is a bit misleading in the sense to promise to talk about Toy Models which it is not at all, the article is about Superposition only, which is great but not what I'd expect looking at the title.

that that first phase of advocacy was net harm

typo

Could you please fix your Wikipedia link( currently hiding the word and from your writing) here?

only Claude 3.5 Sonnet attempting to push past GPT4 class

seems missing awareness of Gemini Pro 1.5 Experimental, latest version made available just yesterday.

The case insensitivity seems strongly connected to the fairly low interest in longevity throughout (the western/developed) society.

Thought experiment: What are you willing to pay/sacrifice in your 20s,30s to get 50 extra days of life vs. on your dead bed/day?

https://consensus.app/papers/ultraviolet-exposure-associated-mortality-analysis-data-stevenson/69a316ed72fd5296891cd416dbac0988/?utm_source=chatgpt

But largely to and fro,

*from?

Why does the form still seem open today? Couldn't that be harmful or wasting quite a chunk of time of people?

Please go further towards maximization of clarity. Let's start by this example:
> Epistemic status: Musings about questioning assumptions and purpose.
Are those your musings about agents questioning their assumptions and word-views?

And like, do you wish to improve your fallacies?

> ability to pursue goals that would not lead to the algorithm’s instability.
higher threshold than ability, like inherent desire/optimisation? 
What kind of stability? Any from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stable_algorithm? I'd focus more on sort of non-fatal influenc... (read more)

https://neelnanda.io/transformer-tutorial-1 link for YouTube tutorial gives 404.-(

> "What, exactly, is the difference between a cult and a religion?"--"The difference is that cults have been formed recently enough, and are small enough, that we are suspicious of them existing for the purpose of taking advantage of the special place we give religion.

now I see why my friends practicing the spiritual path of Falun Dafa have "incorporated" as a religion in my state despite the movement originally denied being classified as a religion as to demonstrate it does not require a fixed set of rituals.

So Alignment program is to be updated to 0 for OpenAI now that Superalignment team is no more? ( https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uPd2S00MqfgXmKHRkVELz5PdFRVzfjDujtu8XLyREgM/edit?usp=sharing )

honestly the code linked is not that complicated..: https://github.com/eggsyntax/py-user-knowledge/blob/aa6c5e57fbd24b0d453bb808b4cc780353f18951/openai_uk.py#L11

To work around the non-top-n you can supply logit_bias list to the API.

As the Llama3 70B base model is said very clean( unlike base DeepSeek for example, which is instruction-spoiled already) and similarly capable to GPT3.5, you could explore that hypothesis.
  Details: Check Groq or TogetherAI for free inference, not sure if test data would fit Llama3 context window.

a worthy platitude(?)

AI-induced problems/risks

possibly https://ai.google.dev/docs/safety_setting_gemini would help or just use the technique of https://arxiv.org/html/2404.01833v1

people to respond with a great deal of skepticism to whether LLM outputs can ever be said to reflect the will and views of the models producing them.
A common response is to suggest that the output has been prompted.
It is of course true that people can manipulate LLMs into saying just about anything, but does that necessarily indicate that the LLM does not have personal opinions, motivations and preferences that can become evident in their output?

So you've just prompted the generator by teasing it with a rhetorical question implying that there are personal opinions evident in the generated text, right?

With a quick test, I find their chat interface prototype experience quite satisfying.

Asserting LLMs' views/opinions should exclude using sampling( even temperature=0, deterministic seed), we should just look at the answers' distribution in the logits. My thesis on why that is not the best practice yet is that OpenAI API only supports logit_bias, not reading the probabilities directly.

This should work well with pre-set A/B/C/D choices, but to some extent with chain/tree of thought too. You'd just revert the final token and look at the probabilities in the last (pass through )step.

Do not say the sampling too lightly, there is likely an amazing delicacy around it.'+)

what happened at Reddit

could there be any link? From a small research I have only obtained that Steve Huffman praised Altman's value to the Reddit board.

makes makes

typo

Would be cool to have a playground or a daily challenge with a code golfing equivalent for a shortest possible LLM prompt to a given  answer.

That could help build some neat understanding or intuitions.

in the limit of arbitrary compute, arbitrary data, and arbitrary algorithmic efficiency, because an LLM which perfectly models the internet

seems worth formulating. My first and second read were What? If I can have arbitrary training data, the LLM will model those, not your internet. I guess you've meant storage for the model?+)

Would be cool if a link to https://manifund.org/about fit somewhere in the beginning of there are more readers like me unfamiliar with the project.

Otherwise a cool write-up, I'm a bit confused with Grant of the month vs. weeks 2-4 which seems a shorter period..also not a big deal though.

On the Twitter spaces 2 days ago, a lot of emphasis seemed put on understanding which to me has a more humble conotation to me.
Still I agree I would not bet on their luck with a choice of a single value to build their systems upon.( Although they have a luckers track record.)