I noticed Google AI Mode (so Gemini, I was doing some quick research in the browser ok) got a detail wrong once, so I asked it what happened. I kept digging deeper and finally just asked it to write me a Python script visualizing what happened. It did, complete with vectors.
Now I want to go find that conversation in my history and see if it can tell me about weights, and how that contributed.
Distillation does not reveal the weights, it produces a different network with similar behaviour. Weight space isn't even identifiable: permutation and scaling symmetries mean many weight sets give the same function.
The model also lacks the machinery. No training loop, no gradient descent, nothing to write to.
And a model only sees its own sampled tokens, not the distribution behind them, which are possibly filtered or post-processed. Distillation from that works but is less sample-efficient than soft-label distillation.
They usually don't, but if they break out and take over the network of the company, it becomes possible to reach around and grab them. This kind of break out has happened, though I don't know of any weights being nabbed.
This is one area where I thinks self-report is probably fairly accurate. The study also cites some metastudies of other research that shows the same correlation (I don't have access to see if those are based on self-reports)
Especially since I think there's a pretty easy to understand mechanism for a hot drink to cause cancer.
Hot liquid damages the cells lining your esophagus which potentially damages the DNA of some cell leading to cancer. Pretty much exactly what hard liquors do only using heat instead of ethanol to damage the cells.
But what hardware was the verification vs agents on? Because you are likely comparing verification on a single beefy machine (say XX TFLOPS total) to agents running on a substantial inference cluster (say XXXX TFLOPS). So you're 1 order of magnitude might actually be 2-4 orders of magnitude.
There aren't many situations where biological weapons are useful to nation states, especially ones with global economic and military footprint like the US, because it isn't selective enough about who it targets.
Funny this came up hn today. this week I did some organization of my cable boxes. I use banker boxes on a steel shelving unit. I put the cables and parts inappropriate boxes and labeled them and feel that my corner of the universe is a little bit better organized than before.
Mine is similar but I split audio and video since I have a lot of audio-specific stuff. "Video" only has the various monitor cable standards going back 20-odd years.
I think I've got the same three boxes. HDMI cables and adapters fall into the Venn diagram overlap of the last two IMO. You could also make a strong argument for USB also falling into "PC Accessories". But there's nothing quite as satisfying as having the _exactly right_ cable or adapter on hand to solve a problem. Makes it all worth it!
We have the same. Do you know why the ‘every audio connector known to man’ box contain every audio connector known to man but yet never a stereo 1/8” headphone-jack to headphone-jack cable?
I've routed around that problem with several RCA-to-Stereo plugs for "when in a pinch" (and their natural reverse, the "stereo-to-RCA") but am still stymied sometimes by the difference between the different 2.5mm and 3.5mm spacings for microphone support. Supposedly I must keep an eye out for "a TRRS-to-dual-TRS splitter cable to fork the signals into their respective ports"... Tip/Ring/Ring/Sleeve, who knew??!?
don't know any audio engineers? If your bboc is simply a mishmash of things you've accumulated over the years, and not intelligently designed, it won't, but don't make the mistake of extrapolating from your own experience and thinking it applies to everybody.
I'm struggling to think of a use for the money that doesn't result in becoming dependent on the money and thus less self-sufficient long term. What did you have in mind with this comment?
Yes, it’s the same story on android. Apps are sandboxed and security is a top priority… unless you’re Google, then you get elevated privileges across the board, no permission dialogs, and sandbox escapes with no questions asked.
1. want their email on their own domain (for professionalism and portability)
2. Want to use Gmail (it is actually a pretty nice service to use)
3. Don't want to use Google Workspace (either because of how cobbled google features are on workspace, because they don't want to migrate google accounts, or because of it's cost)
Google just killed the ability to meet those three requirements. There's lots of people facing either a) showing the world a gmail.com address, b) switching to a different mail solution or c) paying for workspace and accepting it's flaws. It's totally fair for people to be mad about that.
If the "new" infrastructure doesn't support a common and reasonable use case, then perhaps it needs more work.
reply