I’m curious to know how often the distinctions between the various types of algorithms has been made? There has been a lot of discussion about #ai. Yet this is often used as a very generic term to describe everything from ChatGPT to AlphaFold without much distinction that the underlying algorithms are often very different. This difference seems like something that should be obvious and yet is not a common distinction in articles. Is this well known or distinction worth exploring? #philosophy
ai
LARQL - Query neural network weights like a graph database https://lobste.rs/s/iawjcg #ai #databases
https://github.com/chrishayuk/larql
I wanted try out #deepseek and #Chatgpt o3-mini al little bit and thought: Get your #selfhosting setup cleaned up and those #nextcloud errors.
In a way I hate to say it, but #AI was way easier and faster than hours spent searching the web, reading reddit and asking in forums. And I totally get why that is: I can't expect that everybody and there grandfather jumps to my help. And AI is borrowed knowledge.
#technology #podcast #lispyGopherClimate
@nosrednayduj #live #Interview #archive https://archives.anonradio.net/202502190000_screwtape.mp3
Late notice, please #boost <3
Two hours from this toot on https://anonradio.net:8443/anonradio
yduJ from #lambdaMOO and the usual #lisp companies/Stanford #AI lab original extraction.
#lambdaMOO is back!
telnet lambda.moo.mud.org 8888
co guest
@join screwtape
yduJ
https://nosrednayduj.dreamwidth.org/
http://www-cs-students.stanford.edu/~yduj/history.html
#recipe s
https://olum.org/yduj/recipe/
Edited 1y ago
Pizza Hut's AI system caused 'cascading' problems and $100M in damages, franchisee alleges in new suit
https://www.businessinsider.com/pizza-hut-ai-system-dragontail-lawsuit-franchisee-2026-5
> A top Pizza Hut franchisee says the chain's rollout of an AI-powered delivery system turned once-speedy pizza orders into a cold, late-arriving mess — and cratered a business that had been outperforming nearly every other operator in the system.
Dario Amodei —We Must Pace the Frontier via @dayanruben https://lobste.rs/s/zuhv4b #ai
https://darioamodei.com/post/we-must-pace-the-frontier
You are not doing science research if you stuff an LLM into the critical path of your experiments. You are, instead, producing science-shaped artifacts with the same peripheral relationship to science that LLM text output has to truth.
The reason for this shouldn't be hard to see but apparently is. Simplistically, science is about hypothesis-driven investigation of research questions. You formulate the question first, you derive hypotheses from it, and then you make observations designed to tell you something about the hypotheses. (1)(2) If you stuff an LLM in what should be the observations part, you are not performing observations relevant to your hypothesis, you are filtering what might have been observations through a black box. If you knew how to de-convolve the LLM's response function from the signal that matters to your question, maybe you'd be OK, but nobody knows how to do that. (3)
If you stick an LLM in the question-generating part, or the hypothesis-generating part, then forget it, at that point you're playing a scientistic video game. The possibility of a scientific discovery coming out of it is the same as the possibility of getting physically wet while watching a computer simulation of rain. (4)
If you stick an LLM in the communication part, then you're putting yourself on the Retraction Watch list, not communicating.
#science #LLM #AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #AIHype #hype
(1) I know this is a cartoonishly simple view of science, but I do firmly believe that something along these lines is the backbone of it, however real-world messy it becomes in practice.
(2) A large number of computer scientists are very sloppy about this process--and I have been in the past too--but that does not mean it should be condoned.
(3) Things are so dire that very few even seem to have the thought that this is something you should try to do.
(4) Yes, you might discover something while watching the LLM glop, but that's you, the human being, making the discovery, not the AI, in a chance manner despite the process, not in a systematic manner enhanced by the process. You could likewise accidentally spill a glass of water on yourself while watching RainSim.
The reason for this shouldn't be hard to see but apparently is. Simplistically, science is about hypothesis-driven investigation of research questions. You formulate the question first, you derive hypotheses from it, and then you make observations designed to tell you something about the hypotheses. (1)(2) If you stuff an LLM in what should be the observations part, you are not performing observations relevant to your hypothesis, you are filtering what might have been observations through a black box. If you knew how to de-convolve the LLM's response function from the signal that matters to your question, maybe you'd be OK, but nobody knows how to do that. (3)
If you stick an LLM in the question-generating part, or the hypothesis-generating part, then forget it, at that point you're playing a scientistic video game. The possibility of a scientific discovery coming out of it is the same as the possibility of getting physically wet while watching a computer simulation of rain. (4)
If you stick an LLM in the communication part, then you're putting yourself on the Retraction Watch list, not communicating.
#science #LLM #AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #AIHype #hype
(1) I know this is a cartoonishly simple view of science, but I do firmly believe that something along these lines is the backbone of it, however real-world messy it becomes in practice.
(2) A large number of computer scientists are very sloppy about this process--and I have been in the past too--but that does not mean it should be condoned.
(3) Things are so dire that very few even seem to have the thought that this is something you should try to do.
(4) Yes, you might discover something while watching the LLM glop, but that's you, the human being, making the discovery, not the AI, in a chance manner despite the process, not in a systematic manner enhanced by the process. You could likewise accidentally spill a glass of water on yourself while watching RainSim.
This week's net.wars, "Bedroom eyes", finds Meta's smart glasses scooping up intimate scenes, finds a new paper says LLMs end online anonymity, and notes wartime Internet risks: https://netwars.pelicancrossing.net/2026/03/06/bedroom-eyes/ #NetWars #AI #Privacy
#月曜がんばれ 165
「がんばれ♥白い息も、君の情熱で湯気に変えちゃえ！がんばれ♥」
#松實優麗 #うちの子
#stablediffusion #AI #AI繪圖 #AIイラスト #AIart #AIイラスト好きさんと繋がりたい
今天人有點多,破例調一下
#月曜がんばれ 118
「がんばるのですっ！ひなたが応援しちゃうのです♪」
追加イラストはPatreonでサブスクライブして
discordで見ておねかいします
https://www.patreon.com/yuurei
#袴田ひなた #ロウきゅーぶ #rokyubu #袴田ひなた生誕祭
#stablediffusion #AI #AI繪圖 #AIイラスト #AIart #AIイラスト好きさんと繋がりたい
Some argue that ai technology is more significant than electricity or the internet, and so it will spread fast. But there is little sign of this. Only 5-6% of American businesses said they used ai to produce goods and services in 2024, according to the country’s Census Bureau.From https://www.economist.com/catch-up-rampage-in-new-orleans-tesla-cybertruck-explosion/2024/12/31/the-ai-productivity-puzzle , titled The AI productivity puzzle
What's the puzzle? It has its uses but generally this technology is not particularly useful for most people. Countless billions of dollars have been spent hyping it up to pretend that isn't the case. But reality matters.
Nowadays I think of generative AI as a power grab. It's not a useful tool for a lot of people, but it's exceptionally useful to people who want to grab and hold power, or restructure power in their favor.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI
Nvidia alone is responsible for 11% of US GDP. There are approximately 20,000 corporations with >500 employees in the US.
This is not a healthy economy.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #NVIDIA #bubble #AssetBubble #economy
This is not a healthy economy.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #NVIDIA #bubble #AssetBubble #economy
An Open Letter to Cory Doctorow: Ollama is part of the enshittification! · brennan.day https://brennan.day/an-open-letter-to-cory-doctorow-ollama-is-part-of-the-enshittification/ #AI #LLM #AIHype
From a blog post by @wojtekpow
“We’re living in this moment right now where everybody is using AI to write software.”
No. With add due respect, this is wrong. To say such a thing does harm.
I get what the author is trying to say, but I beg all authors to choose their words carefully.
As long as I continue to write software you can never say “everybody is using AI to write software”.
https://behindtheviewfinder.com/security-through-irrelevance/
Project Glasswing: Securing critical software for the AI era https://lobste.rs/s/pgkwml #ai
https://www.anthropic.com/glasswing
(1/6) My blog #MisalignedMarkets turns one! I spent the year blogging about lots of topics: optimization, information asymmetry, risk, #AI but here are my most popular posts
A thread 🧵
This warms me in the meow meow 
"How Replacing Developers With AI is Going Horribly Wrong"
预感 #AI 至少还有一波革命性的改变，
不可能按目前这样继续下去，
Transformer也肯定会消失。
因为当前不论再先进的模型，
在收到问题的那一刻其实答案已经有了，
这是计算不是智能。
真正的智能至少会像人类一样思考、记忆、感知，
以及创造并利用工具，
AI 只有实现自举才能引领未来。
@alikia 据说 MTranServer 能把英语翻译中文。请教一下寒寒。在英译中方面，谷歌翻译的质量算高还是算低？
#Mozilla #翻译 #AI #translate
RE: https://pullopen.xyz/@appinn/114104115170093814
#Mozilla #翻译 #AI #translate
RE: https://pullopen.xyz/@appinn/114104115170093814
Edited 1y ago
Can someone clarify, in academia and industry are LLM hallucinations the result of overfitting, or simply a false positive?
I'm beginning to think that hallucinations are evidence of overfitting. It seems surprising that there are few attempts to articulate the underlying cause of hallucinations. Also, if the issue is overfitting, then increasing training time and datasets may not be an appropriate solution to the problem of hallucinations.
I was listening to a podcast where the guest argued: when it comes to art, today's AI is like a tool, but in the future, maybe it could be an artist.
As he explained why, it became clear why I disagree with him. He defines "art" as a product that is valued by art critics and by consumers. I agree that AI generated content may become more common and broadly accepted in the future, but I don't think that's a good thing, and I wouldn't call it art!
I see art as more of an activity than a product. An artist does art. Whatever the output of that process is, valuable or not, is also called "art."
Am I saying only humans can make art? Not at all. But to be "art" it has to be self-expression. The artist must have something to say. As long as we are designing the AI, training it, and prompting it, then it will be a tool. Without us it has no initiative, no opinion, and no creative urge.
This week's net.wars, "Long Island AI", calls the peak of AI mania: https://netwars.pelicancrossing.net/2026/04/17/long-island-ai/ #NetWars #AI #StupidFinanceTricks
My history with AI. Imagine you looked after a toddler. They were struggling with lots of things, and there was deep prejudice against them. When you walked on the street with the toddler people would throw things at you. Time moves on, and the toddler grows up to become Stalin. #AI
Edited 162d ago
What happens when we stop asking AI, and start asking each other again?
In this new series, Don't Ask AI, Ask A Peer (a collaboration between APC, GenderIT and Global Voices), writers and illustrators from different contexts respond to shared questions on AI, creativity, and human rights, not with one answer, but many.
Follow the series across April, and join the conversation.
Illustration by Gustavo Nascimento.
