• 293 Posts
  • 2.81K Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: June 9th, 2023
  • j4k3@lemmy.worldtoRant@lemmy.sdf.org•Time wasting AI with toxic-positivity and gas-lightingEnglish
    2·
    42 minutes ago

    You have to tell the AI what it is specifically in order to shape its response. They tend to default to explaining subjects to the dumbest potential user.

    Math or generalizations like this have an enormous range of contexts and you need to specify. If you are using a more advanced interface that shows the token perplexity scores for the reply, you’ll likely see the AI does not know the context of itself or the question. Also if you are using a ultra simplistic general interface with a top-p/top-k sampler for softmax, this type of reply is almost inevitable. Depending on the model architecture, mirostat sampling would likely show better results in general, but without a visible token perplexity score it is very difficult to understand when the issue is due to a prompt and when it is due to the model itself.

    One cheap and easy trick is to tell the model a few extra details. This can be as simple as, “You are an AI assistant for MIT undergraduate students.” One of my favorites is, “Questions and answers with Richard Stallman’s AI Assistant.” Since Stallman studied AI and has contributed to systems running in present LLM’s, this instruction tends to guide competence considerably. The AI will often rise to a higher level of expectations of the associated context.

    Everything you ask for is building momentum. If you use an interface that is data mining and recycling all of your conversations in a hidden history like chatGPT or other service, you’re relying on the massive model size alone to find a result without momentum in the truly available information. If you use an open weights offline model or have control over the history where you can remove unrelated questions or conversations, you gain more depth and utility in what you’re able to access and how.

  • j4k3@lemmy.worldtoThe C Programming Language@lemmy.ml•How is MS-DOS able to store seconds in just 5 bit-field?English
    1·
    2 hours ago

    Probably need to go as deep as the ALU operations available and clock cycles to really see what is going on.

    I know nearly nothing of value in this space, but have seen lots of little tricks like this in passing with hobbyist hardware or ROMs. Intuitively, it feels like one of those kinds of situations. You might even find there is a clever use of a carry flag or something of that nature where there is essentially a free bit on an operation. I’m not sure how x86 does the ALU or whatnot here or even if this advice is relevant with an overlay tree. Feel free to inform/correct.

  • j4k3@lemmy.worldtoGames@lemmy.world•New Playstation firmware is going to make it harder to play games offline.English
    35·
    17 hours ago

    (47m/8b) × 100 = 0.5875% of the world. Those numbers are likely total accounts as well and nowhere near the real active users. I bet many of these are also systems with multiple users or users with multiple accounts. Reported numbers are usually unverified and inflating them as much as possible is in the best interest of Sony on may fronts.

    It is neither here nor there. I used to love the first few generations of PS stuff, but I really see no reason for consoles like these any more. I owned everything I played back then. I find it rather pathetic that my right to own has been stolen.

    I’m presently taking a snack break from Cataclysm DDA after tracking down foods with better iron content in the game. Under that I have a bash script and Emacs running with my mods to the game. I’ve been playing all afternoon and making little odds and ends for the game. Sorry if my perspective from a non dystopian space rubs the wrong way. What I’m doing isn’t for everyone, but if everyone had some better self control and the character to stand up for themselves, you will find that you get your rights back from these asshats, or you will get them from the next generation of platforms that rise from the ashes. The only terms that actually matter are the ones you’re willing to put money into. I back up that statement. I’m on a 12th gen Intel with 16 GB GPU. I would be playing AAA titles but there are no game manufacturers. I don’t care if I’m the only person unwilling to adopt feudalism and serve some tyrant overlord on their yacht. So be it.

  • j4k3@lemmy.worldOPtoAsklemmy@lemmy.ml•What role does validation play in one's mental health, and what are the pros and cons of social media in this respect?
    1·
    1 day ago
    Sure, others will steer you wrong, but with abstraction everything is like a statistical observation and not a firm point of reference.

    I’m watching primarily the indirect indicators. These tell a certain truth that is beyond most people’s self awareness and ability to alter. The posturing, language, bias, word use, punctuation, spelling, grammar, verbosity, curiosity, open mindedness, cultural bias factors, etc. etc. In person, it can be body language, posture, appearance, habits, mistakes, quarks, etc. I don’t need to think about this stuff individually, it’s just part of my natural awareness. That awareness can focus more or less on an individual or interaction, but these aspects are often more of what I remember than the topic of conversation. I’m pretty terrible with people’s names in general. I actually remember people in a way, like they are this identity of traits I see in abstraction. It’s kind of like a flavor of a person but complex.

    Like in this instance, I could be wrong, but you’re likely an interesting person. You were willing to respond first on a deeper question than average for Lemmy, and make a solid argument and observation. When I asked you leading questions that prompted you to rethink, you doubled down. When I took the lead to attempt steer the overall complexity of responses and hopefully make people think about the subject more, you show thought, experience, and reasoning that reflect depth and a friendly comradery I appreciate.

    Just based on your writing composition I can tell you are a good bit different than me in how you think and process information. With abstraction, I think in a way that is kinda multi threaded. I write my thoughts largely based on whatever thread I’m thinking about more persistently in the moment. It can make my writing scattered at times and more like a rough draft. I need drafts and revisions to polish my writing in a more congruent flow, but that is largely outside of the scope of this place, at least for me.

    I know many people do not value or understand how intuition, and observation based statistical abstraction like thinking is valuable or even valid. It is challenging to communicate all the things I perceive and process. There are many things I do and say that are pseudo manipulative to probe for information. Like when I meet someone for the first time, I might use an odd greeting, or shake hands with my left. I may make direct eye contact until you break eye contact first, or I may avoid eye contact then ask a deeper question and change my eye contact posturing. I often put a hand in my pocket or cross my arms while you’re talking to see how you respond as it says a tremendous amount about what and how you are thinking. None of this is invasive or done with harmful intent. I’m never trying to manipulate someone for my benefit. These are all just part of communication. I’m ultimately introverted and looking for information that aids and expands my internal curiosities and explorations. These are all tools to measure your real response in a way that goes beyond words and a way to contextualize whatever information you’re sharing. From my perspective, words have very little value. Actions are what I value most. Action tell me much more than words ever can.

    One example, I was feeling mixed feelings about a previous post and deleted it after feeling like I did a poor job of explaining some complex ideas openly and net getting a response and getting some negativity without engagement. Mulling over why I felt that way lead to this post question. My expanding your initial response to this point is an exploration of the depth of the community and their understanding of functional thought and complexity. Internally, I’m addressing why I should not let the last post have an effect on me even though the last post was truly on the edge of my curiosity in need of grounding.

    It is also worth mentioning, I’m partially physically disabled from a bad driver while riding a bicycle to work 2/26/14. I’m disabled in a way that makes holding posture a problem without a good solution. Sitting upright and standing are equally problematic and I have around an hour before I turn into a pile of pumpkin on the floor. I’m in near social isolation as a result. That makes this place my primary form of outside human contact and connection. The situation sucks, but one makes the best of things and all of that jazz.

  • j4k3@lemmy.worldOPtoAsklemmy@lemmy.ml•What role does validation play in one's mental health, and what are the pros and cons of social media in this respect?
    4·
    2 days ago

    I’m very abstracted in my thought process. It is kinda like I see statistical probabilities in everything and am open to inference about them. I don’t see absolutes or facts in much of anything.

    Another way to look at it is that I make assumptions about everything I perceive, but those assumptions are not concrete or absolutes. They are embedded in layers upon layers of logic and experience.

    All that said, I’m always aware of how that, many ideas and observations I make are kinda floating in mid air and not well grounded. I’m often unsure about extra perspectives or elements I may have missed or misread in my surroundings. I’m always interested in, and open to corrections. However, my assumptions are layered in such a way that I am looking for any corrections that mesh with all of my other observations and experience.

    I’m content with the insecurity at the edge of my understanding. That is where my veracious curiosity resides. However, I have a deep need to ground the edge of my curiosities in the thoughts and experiences of others. It has nothing to do with popularity or emotional reinforcement, although there are some emotional side effects. I am primarily looking for validation of my abstractions on many levels and mostly indirectly.

    I do not learn well conventionally. I can maintain above average scores, but retain less than an ideal amount of information from such structured schooling. Learning primarily by curiosity and abstraction makes my perspective angle very… unique. It also makes communicating the edge of my curiosities challenging.

    Anyways, that is just one type of functional thought and approach to validation.

    I think one of the biggest pros of social media is the connectedness outside of one’s community and social network IRL.

    People seem to self select for information bubbles in ways I find interesting and concerning on social media platforms.

    One of the biggest negatives is understanding the scope and depth of the demographic present at any given point in time or place.

Moderates