People can have writing tics, i know i do — that said, this article does read very much like a scrape-n-translate + some "summarized insights" of Chinese forum threads. While that's fully within the scope of a human blogger, it is very much in the wheelhouse of a modern LLM.
More telling rather than any specific lines or phrases, to me, is that the tone gives off a strong "i don't have a single strong feeling about this topic, i'm just transcribing others' opinions and vaguely coming up with a C2A" vibe — no human who'd bother to write a personal-opinions blog would realistically channel that energy into an 850-word essay without LLMs doing all the drudgery.
IMO the hardest parts of learning a new language as an adult is
a) convincing yourself its worth the effort: almost every time an adult runs into a confusing element of a new language, they find themselves calculating how many people in the world speak this language, probability they don't speak english and likelihood of running into this person and circumstance, and it's easy to justify giving up and moving on
b) avoiding forcing it into the framework of your first language: if you have one distinctly favored language already, it's very hard not to try shove the new language you are learning into the former's mold, and this can be counterproductive in learning most languages that don't share an ancestor with your favored one.
a) is greatly mitigated by forcing yourself to be in said context by living in a place prioritizing that language. b) is greatly mitigated by already being bilingual+ with languages from distinct origins (eg: mandarin chinese and english) before learning a new one, so you can place the new language on a spectrum with the ones you already know instead of confined by the rules of just one.
longtime lurker first time account maker. i wouldnt say this was the first time i was tempted to express what felt to me as due acknowledgment nor was this the most compelling, but personal circumstances aligned with the what is apparently a "universal" (as far as human cognition is phenomenologically similar at least among a normal cluster) applicability of your observation on learning as we age, specifically the transactional social/market value of investing one's remaining lifetime. i especially loved the quasiglobal (euro.. swiss euro your emphasis) scope of the swiss school polyglot generator, definitely captured a sense of immensity in your narration (at least to me who understands how one language i dont know is a huge chunk of a known universe i am blind to) so ye anyway thanks, your post was a welcome dose of motivation to learn something complex yet relatively inane but ultimately disproportionately interesting tonight guiltfree not necessarily a new language but something i can brute clone in a childlike brain without the overhead of integrating it with the collective garbage ive recorded of my pov of the history of the universe so far. (i wish)
to be fair, the linked youtube video from the article is literally 4 weeks old, so "at least a month in the past" is probably exactly accurate if you are moving at the same pace as the author.
IME AI coding is excellent for one-off scripts, personal automation tooling (I iterate on a tool to scrape receipts and submit expenses for my specific needs) and generally stuff that can be run in environments where the creator and the end user are effectively the same (and only) entity.
Scaled up slightly, we use it to build plenty of internal tooling in our video content production pipeline (syncing between encoding tools and a status dashboard for our non-technical content team).
Using it for anything more than boilerplate code, well-defined but tedious refactors, or quickly demonstrating how to use an unfamiliar API in production code, before a human takes a full pass at everything is something I'm going to be wary of for a long time.
When LLM's come up with answers to questions that aren't directly exampled in the training data, that's not proof at all that it reasoned its way there — it can very much still be pattern matching without insight from the actual code execution of the answer generation.
If we were taking a walk and you asked me for an explanation for a mathematical concept I have not actually studied, I am fully capable of hazarding a casual guess based on the other topics I have studied within seconds. This is the default approach of an LLM, except with much greater breadth and recall of studied topics than I, as a human, have.
This would be very different than if we sat down at a library and I applied the various concepts and theorems I already knew to make inferences, built upon them, and then derived an understanding based on reasoning of the steps I took (often after backtracking from several reasoning dead ends) before providing the explanation.
If you ask an LLM to explain their reasoning, it's unclear whether it just guessed the explanation and reasoning too, or if that was actually the set of steps it took to get to the first answer they gave you. This is why LLMs are able to correct themselves after claiming strawberry has 2 rs, but when providing (guessing again) their explanations they make more "relevant" guesses.
I'm not sure what "just guessed" means here. My experience with LLMs is that their "guesses" are far more reliable than a human's casual guess. And, as you say, they can provide cogent "explanations" of their "reasoning." Again, you say they might be "just guessing" at the explanation, what does that really mean if the explanation is cogent and seems to provide at least a plausible explanation for the behavior? (By the way, I'm sure you know that plenty of people think that human explanations for their behavior are also mere narrative reconstructions.)
I don't have a strong view about whether LLMS are really reasoning -- whatever that might mean. But the point I was responding to is that LLMS have simply memorized all the answers. That is clearly not true under any normal meanings of those words.
> generating a video under prompt constraints is basically playing a game
Besides static puzzles (like a maze or jigsaw) I don't believe this analogy holds? A model working with prompt constraints that aren't evolving or being added over the course of "navigating" the generation of the model's output means it needs to process 0 new information that it didn't come up with itself — playing a game is different from other generation because it's primarily about reacting to input you didn't know the precise timing/spatial details of, but can learn that they come within a known set of higher order rules. Obviously the more finite/deterministic/predictably probabilistic the video game's solution space, the more it can be inferred from the initial state, aka reduce to the same type of problem as generating a video from a prompt), which is why models are still able to play video games. But as GP pointed out, transfer function negative in such cases — the overarching rules are not predictable enough across disparate genres.
> I think you could prompt veo3 to play any game for a few seconds
I'm curious what your threshold for what constitutes "play any game" is in this claim? If I wrote a script that maps button combinations to average pixel color of a portion of the screen buffer, by what metric(s) would veo3 be "playing" the game more or better than that script "for a few seconds"?
It's not ideal, but you can prompt it with an image of a game frame, explain the objects and physics in text and let it generate a few frames of gameplay as a substitute for controller input as well as what it expects as an outcome. I am not talking about real interactive gameplay.
I am just saying we have proof that it can understand complex worlds and sets of rules, and then abide by them. It doesn't know how to use a controller and it doesn't know how to explore the game physics on its own, but those steps are much easier to implement based on how coding agents are able to iterate and explore solutions.
fair, and I edited my choice of words, but if you're reading that much aggression from my initial comment (which contains topical discussion) to say what you did, you must find the internet a far more savage place than it really is :/
> "They threatened me with a minimum fine of $5,000 or five years in prison if I refused to provide the password to my phone."
this isn't real/legal/enforceable (as the law currently stands) is it? how does one protect ourselves against this turn of events upon entry when the immigration officer's claim fails the smell test?
CBP has broad search authority at borders without warrants, and while they can't criminally charge you for refusing to unlock your device, they can deny entry, seize the device, and ban you from future entry - effectively making the "5 years in prison" threat misleading but the practical consequences still severe.
?? This has been called out for more than a decade I think. Within 100 miles of the border CBP has broad discretion and rights are limited in these types of circumstances.
IANAL, but I would expect that it's extremely unlikely to be fined or imprisoned when you can simply be deported prior to entry. Technically until you pass through border control, you aren't "in" the country you are traveling to, so they can simply refuse entry and deport you.
I'm pretty sure in a free market, how much someone is willing to pay for something is what determines how much a company charges for something, not how much it cost to provide. We wouldn't have inflation of most goods/services if it was based on how much it cost to produce/provide.
True - how much someone is willing to pay matters. However in a competitive market, companies can’t just charge whatever people will pay. Competitors will undercut them, so prices should eventually align with the cost of production plus a reasonable margin.
You're right, but generally in a free market competition will force prices down until they are close enough to production costs that going lower risks loss. In practice this rarely happens because we don't really have "free" markets, but rather a weird hybrid plus legal landmines all over the place.
Nope. In free market theory (=perfect competition, no barriers to entry, unlimited buyers etc.) prices are set as the equilibrium where demand equals supply. Supply ends up being equal to marginal cost in the mathematical limit. So in this limit, companies no longer make profit because if they charge cost+epsilon, they will loose demand to other suppliers. That's literally what you learn in economics 101. Of course in the real world you won't reach that limit, but getting to it within first order is still very good for consumers. The further you go away from this free market state, the more companies can extract what consumers "are still willing to pay" (irrespective of their cost) as you say. The opposite limit is the monopoly, where consumer welfare doesn't matter at all and companies can set their prices to maximise their own profit, because they don't need to adhere to any supply curve. They can literally charge extra until people go broke for inelastic demand curves like those of basic utilities (which phones are becoming more and more).
I used to live in Berkeley, CA circa 2013. They had a tool library, which was part of the local public library system, and tools were free (!) to rent. I miss it everyday, as it was a godsend for broke new grads who still wanted to do some quick but heavyduty DIY.
I now live in NYC, and my local Home Depot rents out power tools for $20-30/day. The typical tool would pay for itself in 2 days at these rates, but it's still worth it to me as these 2 days are often 2-3 years apart and I'd rather not store these tools in my cramped 1BR.
What I would love is a community-run tool rental service where we can donate a tool + pay a nominal membership fee, and borrow tools for free. I am happy to donate a $120 circular saw/impact driver if I can rent 10x different tools once each for $5/mo for the next year. The closest thing I have now is my local hackerspace, which is great, but I often have to work on my projects at the space, which limits the kind of home DIY I can do.
Minneapolis/St Paul has at least one tool library (with multiple locations). MN Tool Library. Mentioning it in case someone in this thread is interested and lives nearby. Worth it, especially if you know have projects coming up. Lots of tools, indoor and outdoor, and some space for using the tools at their space , and lots of know-how from the staff/volunteers.
Edit: in the same vein, Minneapolis also has a Toy Library that is pay what you can for annual membership and absolutely stocked with toys for every age, and includes outdoor stuff like trampolines and bikes (small sizes) and board games and such. Very worth it for kids that only maintain interest for 2 hours and helps them learn how to give up a toy before getting a new one (similar to adults learning to return a tool…)
The Brooklyn Public Library in Green Point has a tool library, although it isn't very large if that's close to you at all. I'm not sure if it's available at any other library locations but the one in Green Point is fairly new and has great programming.
We have a large ~20K person BuyNothing community in my area (also NYC), and a few of us have thrown the same idea of a tool library around. We always hit a wall on the discussion of liability & liability insurance. Any ideas on how other organizations solve this?
Oui, la question de la responsabilité revient souvent. Certaines communautés utilisent des décharges de responsabilité, systèmes de dépôt, et/ou assurances.
On aimerait vraiment collaborer avec votre communauté pour comprendre les besoins et mettre en place quelque chose avant le lancement de notre service de location. N’hésitez pas à me contacter à julien@patio.so si vous voulez en discuter !
That's a really good idea. A community-run tool library with donations + a small monthly fee could be a game changer, especially in dense cities. It makes DIY more accessible without the cost or storage hassle. We'll certainly think about how this model could be implemented!!
There was one running in Frome, UK but unfortunately these community things are hard to keep going and it has now closed. The issues are cost of storage space, insurance, staffing etc.
Thanks a lot for sharing, yes even if there is a lots of need, there is also a lot of issues when it comes to tool rental. I'm sad to see another one that might end up closing but or goal is to create a platform that will help these community to grow by simplifying their work.
Thanks for sharing! One of our goals is to support initiatives like this and make it easier to start and operate them. We truly hope to help make tool libraries more common in as many cities as possible!
Portland OR has a system of free-to-use tool libraries (you pay 'library fines' if you return tools late, but checking them out is free), each quadrant of the city has one (and you can only use the one in your section of the city). For example[1]
More telling rather than any specific lines or phrases, to me, is that the tone gives off a strong "i don't have a single strong feeling about this topic, i'm just transcribing others' opinions and vaguely coming up with a C2A" vibe — no human who'd bother to write a personal-opinions blog would realistically channel that energy into an 850-word essay without LLMs doing all the drudgery.
reply