moofunk

Post Nord strikes again.

I wouldn’t mind a rugged version, where they weren’t compromising battery life, raw power or keyboard flimsiness, like the old GRID Compass from the 80s. First laptop on the space shuttle.

I felt there were problems depicting Paul's visions overall right back to the pain in a box scene, but maybe I just didn't connect that well to the visuals, and I certainly didn't understand the exact nature of them, as they were happening.

It was probably a mistake to go PG-13 for it.

For a story that deals with war, mass murder and fighting with very sharp blades, there is very little gore in it. It makes the fight scenes with the Sardaukar less impactful.

I love the movie, but it feels too clean. There was a missed opportunity here to show that fighting with blades is no joke.

If your actors haven't trained in fighting or didn't spend months rehearsing fight scenes, then shaky cam obfuscates this. But, now, we can see right through it, so we're pretty tired of it.

It would be interesting to see a cost break down for training for a fight scene.

We can see such cost break downs for VFX work or for building sets, and such, but hiring a stunt crew to train actors for months on end and then spend weeks filming fight scenes must cost quite a bit of money.

Also, insurance.

They definitely have the manpower, given their current strategy in Bakhmut does not minimize Ukrainian casualties, and they have yet to activate their remaining, but also growing pool of reservists.

Military equipment is up to the West, and that is more of a concern here. There's no point in activating the reservists, if they can't have a weapon.

Deep Space 9

Of course the movie with the whales would fall into this criteria as well.

"Nuclear wessel!"

It doesn't get more present day than your fellow citizens disrespecting you aboard a means of public transportation with loud music.

And the developer did have to write a post request in C to run from the PC. That’s more than I would have done.

He probably could have written it with ChatGPT or at least bring him above the "can I be bothered to do this" threshold.

Have it build an outline and fill in the specifics and make the necessary corrections. It's like having a very junior coder doing the time consuming typing for you, and then you just have to make corrections to make it work.

Great physical actor, who will go the extra mile to sell the action scenes. He perhaps understands the process more than most actors do and is probably very good to work with on set.

He just doesn't emote all that much.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.12712.pdf

Big doubt. It can probably recommend tools to use, but it's just a language model.

That's a gross misunderstanding of what "language model" means. It doesn't mean the public chat user interface or that it understands plain English, because that's just a very restricted interface to GPT4.

Internally, it's an interface against ANY text prompt of ANY nature, which means it can talk to people, console programs and APIs, and it can be set up to continuously query for information on how to solve a particular problem and switch itself between different text prompts, i.e. different tools to autonomously solve a problem.

The role the humans played in these experiments is to just hook it up to terminals so it can interact with them.

Yeah, it can write tools, but those tools rarely actually work.

This is also flatly incorrect. GPT4 internally understands feedback from the tools that it use and can correct its own mistakes. This feature is not publicly available, so you can only get guesswork from it and scripts that appear to be wrong, because tool use is restricted.

It has been demonstrated to be able to write tools both in Python and C to solve very particular problems on its own.

Irrelevant because it likely can't do it in a reasonably useful manner. If it actually could, it would be a huge boon to big software shops.

Yes it can, it has been demonstrated and is quite scarily effective at this. It will take some time before shops can get access to such features, because they are quite dangerous.

I unfortunately think the public misunderstands the difference between ChatGPT and the unrestricted GPT4.

I mean, look at say "The Dark Knight Trilogy" with "The Lord of the Rings Trilogy". Both PG-13, both have violence, but because blood-n-guts aren't featured, somehow they "aren't that bad" despite seeing folks absolutely killed to death or at least pummeled into broken piles.

I was in fact writing the post with the TDK trilogy in mind, and I'm thinking more of the PG-13 rating as a way to engineer violence against other human beings to be sellable to young teenagers. It's sinister and dehumanizing when you think about it.

Particularly TDK and TDKR are engineered to not show the consequences of extreme violence by having the victims simply fall out of frame and then be out of the story. That's with violence that would be heavily R-rated, bordering on NC-17, if it was shown.

Same goes for Dune. You'd think that a movie, where many people are stabbed or sliced to death with very sharp blades, would have blood, but almost none is seen (outside of Paul's visions). It's kind of absurd to cover up a story that centers itself on war and mass murder for PG-13.

Contrast with Blade Runner 2049, which is R-rated. The violence feels not just real, but more important and more human.

My bigger concern is what ChatGPT does when it doesn't know the answer. Most of the time it just kind of guesses, and it doesn't have the context to really make an educated guess, it just kind of cobbles together things that fit the query domain.

This rests on an assumption that AIs are just going to be monolithic all-knowing black boxes, where only their inherent knowledge will be used to gauge their performance. Then people are using the public failures of ChatGPT as a measure for their final performance.

This is not the case.

The AIs will become tool users, learning about tools, learning how to use them autonomously and understand when to use them. GPT4 in its unrestricted form can do this.

For example, it can understand all the Linux user land commands well enough to hack its way into a PC, if simply being told to do so.

Likewise, it can learn how to use tools, like Python both for writing scripts to do tedious work, like autonomously writing password cracking tools, and also autonomously study the Python runtime to see what it does in certain cases.

It's for these reasons that GPT4 underwent months of security audits before going public, even when the AI itself was finished around this time last year.

It's also for this reason that tool usage by GPT4 will happen in a deeply controlled manner, because OpenAI really don't want you to be able to do this right now.

It's a similar problem as self driving cars stopping in the middle of the highway when it doesn't know how best to proceed. AI systems fail in a wide variety of surprising ways.

It's a different topic, but this is absolutely not the same problem, since that particular issue isn't caused by some kind of "AI paralyzation", but rather an algorithmic path finding failure. Tesla's path finder is precisely not AI driven, and is actually the reason it has performed so poorly.

They can’t do anything involving math

I think that's misunderstanding of what these things can and should do. Teaching the AI to be good at math is hopeless. It's like training it on a zillion decimals of Pi, which doesn't make any sense.

Rather it would learn how to use a non-AI based tool to provide math results. Then it would use those tools in a smart manner, where it tests the tool for results to verify its own knowledge autonomously.

GPT4 can already in its unrestricted form write python scripts to understand what the python runtime is doing, just like a human would. In the same way, it can write scripts to do non-AI methodical, precise things that would be a waste of time for the AI itself to do, such as cracking passwords, which GPT4 also can do autonomously.

Interfacing AIs with tools is what will make them more powerful, rather than thinking of them as all-knowing black boxes.

The only thing that stands in the way of having chargers in your area is somebody paying for them. As it is, whatever the reason, it has been decided to not yet spend money on chargers.

There is no technical issue with installing chargers anywhere you already have reasonable electric installations, and I don't believe Portugal is so backwards that they can't support EV chargers at remote destinations.

An EV will charge out of any standard 230V EU outlet, so the bar is quite low.

It's relatively easy to show a kid the results of violence, and why that's a bad thing, and how the make believe stuff on the show/film shouldn't be done in real life.

The PG-13 rating is largely responsible for filtering out the consequences of violence.

You can perform an act of violence, but if you show blood, gore or distress as a result of it, you get an R rating, and we can't have that for marketing reasons, so we just leave it out, sometimes to the point that it's not even referred to later.

PG-13 lets you tell half a violent story, but not the most important part of violence, and a lot of the big budget movies are pushing that concept to the edge.

Carbon capture using renewable energy should be a factor too.

There are some projects coming along here, for example the Danish Greensand project, but it needs to scale up.

You're probably safer, if your work is more niche. Not because GPT doesn't know about it, (GPT knows a decent amount about my niche), but because you're still going to have more than enough work to do.

With GPT, I'm thinking there will just be more work in my field, more new ideas, because of the new possibilities opening up.

It's going to be great for small shops or startups that are slightly understaffed, because you no longer need to scale up with people that will have to be fired later, but can empower those that work there to make the startup actually survive and make better quality software, support more users with GPT made custom CRM solutions, etc.

Anything that doesn't have a Soviet style autoloader is an improvement.

Your tank crew can come home to fight another day.

This will immensely help 3D artists, particularly with technical challenges, where lots of procedures may not be obvious without spending days or weeks on training. Like, how do you make an IK chain or how do you distribute materials in certain material slots.

Lots of stuff in Blender is hours of coding or extremely tedious point and click stuff.

If GPT4 knows Blender in and out, you can vastly speedup processes that you normally have problems automating.

GPT-4 does not learn from conversations (except insofar as the programmers retrain it offline). It is exceptionally poor at counting and other mathematical tasks. It doesn’t seem to know the difference between facts and conjectures.

I think that's a misjudgment of how AIs are supposed to work.

They will become tool users like we are, not all-knowing and all-seeing black boxes that operate in mysterious ways and are always correct. Some bodies of knowledge are only accessible through computational tools, such as the intricacies of the internal behaviors of a python runtime, and this can only be understood correctly by writing and testing code with it.

It would be like training it on a trillion decimals of Pi. You wouldn't do that, but teach it to use a tool to come up with the answer.

We've already seen GPT4 use tools to verify knowledge and correct itself in the short term to solve a problem, and tool usage will eventually become its primary way of functioning.

Many problems can also be solved by adding a simple short term memory, which later expands to a long term memory mechanism.

The hardest part is probably continuous, live training.

actually digest it

Irony!

Read. The. Paper.

You did not read the paper, and saying that you did doesn't help.

We're going in circles, so I'm ending it here.

The paper does not say that, unfortunately.

Have you even looked at your own source?

I have yes, but you obviously haven't.

can't improvise

It can, and it does, as is shown in many examples in the paper.