I'm just a parrot owner and have no sources for this, but I'd be surprised if they didn't. Birds are very sound-oriented, have to make split second decisions while in the air to avoid collisions and to react to flock calls while they're moving, etc.
At least in parrots, they love playing with sounds. They'll bang things, tap on things, throw things around, and even scream into different objects just to hear the difference. They also have decent object permanence, speaking anecdotally.
20g is a loading dose (typically for a week), then it's 3-5g daily for maintenance. But I've seen studies that 5g daily catches up to the 20g loading dose after about a month.
I've taken creatine for 20+ years, nobody does the "loading" dose anymore, or shouldn't be if they still do. Maybe it stills says it on the jars but there was tons of information a decade or more ago that it was deemed as a way to get you to blast through your jug faster. 5g is the normal dose. You're always taking in creatine eating normal meat added meals.
This is giving me flashbacks to using bodybuilding.com forums.. man, long time ago.
It is my 100% always buy supplement. I only have 2 of those now, protein the other. It absolutely helps me think better and feel better throughout the day. Noticeable when I stop taking it. And its dirt cheap. If I had more disposable income I'd have a few others but I went from tons of supplements to basically nothing. I never use PWOs or anything now, even when I do have money.
I haven't seen the 20g loading dose recommendation on anything recently either. Everything I've seen just recommends 5g/daily.
My regular supplements that I've noticed made any difference is: creatine, vitamin D, and fiber. With vitamin C and protein being situational as needed.
I feel the same way about creatine (and increasingly protein).
One thing that might help me notice creatine more is that I haven't drank much caffeine for some reason.. and the longer I've been able to put it off or minimize it, the more of an unfair advantage it has become when I've started.
while they had notable misses like 20g to load, they weren't terribly wrong either, and the forums were -- for a while, anyway -- pretty positive, helpful places.
early internet meant the worst idiots hadn't gotten there yet.
Yeah pretty much this. I took creatine back in high school/college to build muscle mass. In those days we would load with 20g for a week -> then do 5g for 8 weeks -> cycle off for two weeks -> repeat.
I'm back on it now for endurance sports (trail running + cycling) and the advice is to just take 5g a day and don't worry about cycling off. At 5g/day it takes 4-6 weeks to saturate your muscles.
It does have a noticeable impact on water retention, so this year I cycled off six weeks away from my "A" race and lost 5lbs of water weight. It was a 100 mile mountain ultra so I thought the extra pop on the climbs probably wasn't worth the extra weight over the entire course (but probably was worth it while doing hill reps in training). Next year I'm sticking to shorter stuff where I'll run up more climbs. For those I don't plan to cycle off.
This time, until they dont anymore. The next stage is people attacking the mathematicians and accusing them. The OpenAI fans come out to attack, then the masses will pick sides and it all just becomes a mess
> I should also emphasize that this is not an institutional effort. It is a strictly personal collaboration between the two of us, and there is no formal agreement behind it. I pay for the tools my group uses out of my own research funds, including footing a large bill to OpenAI.
The non-Anthropic employee, Tristan Buckmaster, is the one paying for OpenAI models and presumably the one who chose to use them. The Anthropic employee, Levent Alpöge, was collaborating in his personal capacity, and obviously it wouldn't make sense for him to cut off their work together just because his employer's competitor's tool was used.
I suspect this controversy will blow the case for ZDR wide open. Whatever the facts (possibly unknowable), it's going to become a very public lesson that data sovereignty was never about "having nothing to hide".
If this is what they do to academic pure mathematicians, where the stakes are so low (financially)—just imagine the sort of front-running that could be happening in other places.
I doubt it would've made any difference, zero data retention is truly trivial to get around and I think it's highly likely OAI is already doing this. Just use another model to distill, summarize, and/or paraphrase the data and boom - you get to train on the ideas, while claiming zero data retention, which is true. You legitimately retained zero data.
Very true, unfortunately it is just about repeating something for long enough so you micro agree on certain things and adopt a new "normal" and that volume of info is getting out of hand
reply