Yeah it’s actually one of the ways I caught a previous manager using AI for their own writing (things that should not have been done with AI). They were supposed to write about something in a hyper-specific field and an entire paragraph ended up just being a rewording of one of two (third party) website pages that discuss this topic directly.
Okay so both of those ideas are incorrect.
As I said, many are literally Markovian and the main discriminator is beam, which does not really matter for helping people understand my meaning nor should it confuse anyone that understands this topic. I will repeat: there are examples that are literally Markovian. In your example, it would be me saying there are rectangular phones but you step in to say, “but look those ones are curved! You should call it a shape, not a rectangle.” I’m not really wrong and your point is a nitpick that makes communication worse.
In terms of stochastic processes, no, that is incredibly vague just like calling a phone a “shape” would not be more descriptive or communicate better. So many things follow stochastic processes that are nothing like a Markov chain, whereas LLMs are like Markov Chains, either literally being them or being a modified version that uses derived tree representations.
Is this referring to what I said about Markov chains or stochastic processes? If it’s the former the only discriminating factor is beam and not all LLMs use that. If it’s the latter then I don’t know what you mean. Molecular dffusion is a classic stochastic process, I am 100% correct in my example.
Tankie was originally a Trotskyist term for the people that supported tolling tanks into Hungary in the 50s.
Of course, the term “authoritarian bootlicker” is a funny one, as its purveyors have a habit of recycling and promulgating the propaganda pushes of the US State Department and opposition to that tendency is often what gets one labelled a tankie. Like when MLK spoke positively of Castro’s revolution or a Vietnam united under Ho Chi Minh rather than targeted for bombing by the US. Though I am being generous: so many people using the term are so politically illiterate that they apply it to basically anything vaguely left that they disagree with.
I think you’d be calling him a tankie.
But that’s so vague. Molecules semi-randomly smashin into each other is a stochastic process
What term is that?
Because it’s close enough. Turn off beam and redefine your state space and the property holds.
Lemmitors would’ve called King a tankie
“AI” is a parlor trick. Very impressive at first, then you realize there isn’t much to it that is actually meaningful. It regurgitates language patterns, patterns in images, etc. It can make a great Markov chain. But if you want to create an “AI” that just mines research papers, it will be unable to do useful things like synthesize information or describe the state of a research field. It is incapable of critical or analytical approaches. It will only be able to answer simple questions with dubious accuracy and to summarize texts (also with dubious accuracy).
Let’s say you want to understand research on sugar and obesity using only a corpus from peer reviewed articles. You want to ask something like, “what is the relationship between sugar and obesity?”. What will LLMs do when you ask this question? Well, they will just attempt to do associations and to construct reasonable-sounding sentences based on their set of research articles. They might even just take an actual semtence from an article and reframe it a little, just like a high schooler trying to get away with plagiarism. But they won’t be able to actually mechanistically explain the overall mechanisms and will fall flat on their face when trying to discern nonsense funded by food lobbies from critical research. LLMs do not think or criticize. Of they do produce an answer that suggests controversy it will be because they either recognized diversity in the papers or, more likely, their corpus contains reviee articles that criticize articles funded by the food industry. But it will be unable to actually criticize the poor work or provide a summary of the relationship between sugar and obesity based on any actual understanding that questions, for example, whether this is even a valid question to ask in the first place (bodies are not simple!). It can only copy and mimic.
To be honest it isn’t that complicated. Who stood to gain? What equipment and expertise is required for this kind of operation? And why are all of these Western countries being shady and coy about their “investigations”?
Obviously this was done via US channels and with US approval. Biden even made vague threatening remarks about it.
It appears that their bit is to act like they don’t understand very simple memes.
That’s too 5-d chess for “the US” to pull off.
It is not a complicated strategy. It just requires a large group that cares about the petrodollar. The US has a ton of those people in high places in government and finance.
The US invented the petrodollar.
I find it more plausible that the US supports Israel because Israel has a lot of powerful supporters in the US who manipulate public opinion and government policy.
Israel has powerful supporters in the US because it is in the interests of capital to support Israel. The higher interests of capital do understand why the Middle East must be destabilized for their own gain. They are fully aware of and influence, for example, the invasion to control Iraq’s oil fields and depose the government of Iraq that was acting too sovereign about it. Same for the Syrian oil fields seized and controlled by the US to this day. This is also why the US promotes the Saudis as an ally - they stabilize the petrodollar system. It is no coincidence that they also target an independent Yemem.
Powerful supporters are just the middlemen for capital, as are major media campaigns. It is not explanatory to say that powerful people support a country or policy. Of course they must do so, that is how every policy decision happens: the powerful people fall in line with the decisions of capital, decisions that may have been made decades ago but are now entrenched. Capital also leverages its close collaboration with the highest levels of the state. The White House is constantly consulting finance, economic advisors from finance, think tanks built to advance the interests of finance, etc (finance is the dominsnt wing of caoital in the US). And in the other direction, capital is constantly making threats and PR pushes.
Yes and particularly from his special little Gazan genocide task force.
You wouldn’t commodify an animal to the extent that you clone and breed it exclusively for rich losers to “hunt” them in enclosed outdoor spaces using helicopters and four wheelers.
The summary in the screenshot is wild.
The recent military attacks on the people of Lebanon have increased Netanyahu’s popularity. When people talk about Netanyahu being unpopular, they often forget that this is because his government isn’t sufficiently meeting demands for blood and retribution and making the Israeli Ubermenschen feel like they are perfectly safe and dominant at all times. Attacks on Lebanon checks all 3 boxes, at least in their minds.
These kinda of things are why the US supports Israel. It helps destabilize the neighbors that don’t fall in line with US interests. The US fears a sovereign Middle East where they get to choose what to do with their own countries and resources, not just for the usual Imperialist reasons, but because of the importance of the petrodollar system.
While it’s good to become familiar with the specifics so that you can process the allegations correctly, it boils down to something very simple: the Israeli state and their Zionist backers gladly lie to justify every bit of violence they do to Palestinians. Accuracy does not matter to them, only consent for apartheid, occupation, genocide. When you contradict them in-person they become outraged and start hurling baseless accusations (e.g. antisemitism) for the simple reason that they have no basis other than ethnic supremacy and a desire to punch down, but they know they cannot actually say this.
Treat such people like you would Neo-Nazis. You will not convince them, they don’t care about what is true or right, only the elevation of their own status. Instead, you must out-organize them. Join and build organizations that are coherently against the occupation and treat it as an ontological evil like apartheid in South Africa. Do not let yourself be coopted by the people supplying the weapons and diplomatic cover to carry out this racist project.
This article almost exclusively cites untrustworthy sources affiliated with or otherwise funded by Israeli or US state apparatuses. It presents a narrative and zero questioning of its sources’ claims.
As a reminder, Israel’s allegedly sophisticated penetration and assassination was to (1) do supply chain terrorism on pagers, hitting a huge number of people, including physicians, and (2) use US-supplied bunker busters to destroy swathes of a residential neighborhood, including its inhabitants.
Both acts are the exact opposite of precision or sophistication. They are simply more depraved than most people normally consider acceptable.
Oh I’m engaging.
No, you are ignoring 90% of what I say so that I have to repeat myself because you say things I’ve already contradicted. I assume this is a defensive reaction to having your genocide support called out.
You are fucking stupid. You are wrong. You are arguing in bad faith
If I was any of those things you could run circles around me and tackle my arguments. Instead you are avoiding and ignoring nearly everything I say. In contrast, I have addressed basically everything you have said, despite those behaviors.
You are now defensively lashing out rather than address what I said.
I fully expect that you’re a foreign actor or influenced by them. How’s that for engaging.
It’s the opposite if engaging, it is playing with imaginary BS to continue lashing out rather than address what was said.
Your support for genociders is not strategic and you do not sound like someone that is actually doing anything else. You sound like someone that really wants to vote for those genociders and then stop thinking about it.
The very first response I gave said you just have to reframe state.
This is getting repetitive and I think it is because you aren’t really trying to understand what I am saying. Please let me know when you are ready to have an actual conversation.