| ▲ | profsummergig 2 hours ago |
| The human mind cannot comprehend the capacity of massively multidimensional space. Just going from 2D to 3D creates massive new positional potential (e.g. surface of the earth, vs. the atmosphere above earth...). Now imagine 1,000 dimensions. |
|
| ▲ | larodi an hour ago | parent | next [-] |
| Imagine a box of balls. They have size, weight, colour, density… etc. These properties, each a measure, are dimensions and they are orthogonal to each other. Taken together are multi-dimensional. |
| |
| ▲ | qsera an hour ago | parent [-] | | Now take a set of words. They have "sizeness", "weightness", "colorness" and "densityness"...and "pythonness" and "haskellness" and even "adjectiveness" and "verbness" and so on and so forth...You can readily see that this can encode arbitrary patters (like language grammer or program syntax) Training identifies these dimensions in the training data and links it with each word/token. Then given a stream of such tokens, each with its own set of dimensions (which can be huge), and LLM predicts the dimensions that the next token is most likely to have... |
|
|
| ▲ | hliyan 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This is nonsense. The human mind cannot visualize more than 3 dimensions. It can perfectly comprehend any number of dimensions as long as they are represented in a vector space. In fact, that's what linear algebra does. |
| |
| ▲ | NitpickLawyer 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I think you accidentally a word, there. GP is talking about comprehending the capacity of massively multi-dimensional space. | | | |
| ▲ | gfody 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I think the human mind can visualize anything, eg here are some visual descriptions of higher dimensional objects: https://gfody.substack.com/p/mini-hyper-golf | |
| ▲ | sublinear 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yes. It's worth pointing out that anything with n distinct parameters is just a point in n-dimensional space. We're so used to handling so many dimensions that nobody ever bats an eye until someone brings up the magic word "dimensions". It's quite intuitive actually. The trivial example that comes to mind is the character customization sliders in many video games. |
|
|
| ▲ | qsera 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| >The human mind cannot comprehend the capacity of massively multidimensional space. That is why the scam works, because investors are humans... |
| |
| ▲ | left-struck 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Which scam sorry? | | |
| ▲ | qsera 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | The scam that is based on the implicit claim that LLM is a path to AGI. Seeing LLMs for what they really are will also make it clear they are fundamentally unfit for a lot of tasks they are currently marketed for... | | |
| ▲ | kleiba2 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Too broad a statement, and without substantiation, to be taken serious, sorry. | | |
| ▲ | sublinear 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Too shallow of a dismissal, and you don't determine what everyone else takes seriously. It's been several years now of LLMs only appeasing those with low expectations and inexperience. Unless the only goal was generating boilerplate or really sloppy proofs of concept, LLMs are a waste time for everyone else. This argument is so over already. We're all just hoping for a soft landing when the hangover really kicks in. | | |
| ▲ | brabel an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | You are disconnected from reality. The whole industry is already completely dominated by LLMs generating code. Bury your head in the sand all you want. This is not about low expectations or inexperience at all. Your condescending tone doesn't make you look smarter, it makes you look like an Amish who expects the industrial revolution is temporary and soon people will come to their senses and stop using all this nonsense industrial technology. | | |
| ▲ | Madmallard 42 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Yup and the industry is worse than ever. Maybe you forgot that important tidbit? People are using them because they're being shoved down their throats and they're complacent. Software quality, maintainability, exploitability, morale, competency are all at all-time lows and just worsening. It's really bad to defend this. |
| |
| ▲ | pineaux 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | What about the mathematical advancements? | | |
| ▲ | sublinear 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Doesn't that say more about the massive crumb tray nobody ever bothered to empty at the bottom of mathematics? I'm sure someone will point out something like the 4-color theorem as a counterargument. Where is that kind of theorem proving in this generation of AI? We seem to have hit a dead end rather quickly. |
|
| |
| ▲ | Madmallard 42 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Is it? They're borderline useless and certainly potentially inadvertently malicious for writing, customer service, speech to text, writing large amounts of complex code, therapy, medical diagnostics... the list goes on Sounds like you're part of the problem? It's really a serious problem just eroding the fabric of society in real-time. Being complacent in it or believing in the promise is just wholly foolish and bad for everyone. |
|
|
|
|
