I will tell you how: derangement, a failure to engage with society and the degeneration/depravity of being one step away from making MIDI component improvised explosives and emailing your remaining friends a manifesto.
The car industry has been lobbying congress and locales for 50+ years. Laws like jaywalking were at the behest of car companies, and that alone makes walking legally very difficult in nearly any area with a downtown.
The lack of subsidies certainly don't help. Neither does the insatiable appetite for new cars.
I assume this was 4o? Whenever someone says GPT would be "useless" at the given task, I think they've only tried it with older/dumber models. Almost without fail 4 seems to get the answer right.
I would argue that the neutrino is relatively large compared to the quanta typical of these kinds of tests, but in the abstract they suggested a basketball!
I think most test of bell inequality are made using photons. I'm not sure about this inequality. Neutrons are much bigger than photons [1], but somewhat similar experiments of interference have been made with helium atoms and even small molecules (with 10 atoms or so).
So if they say it's big in the quantum word, I expect at least a molecule. And the article saying macroscopic everywhere really sugest basketballs.
From the initial description, I was optimistic and I was expecting small dots of "dust", or a tiny thin membrane. There are some experimental results with extremly small object, but I guess they have a lot of thechnical problems and are difficult to use them in complex measurements.
I agree. (I missed the "ino".) It's also important that (as far as we know) the neutrino is an elementary particle, but the neutron is composed by three real quarks and a lot of virtual quarks and gluons, it's a huge mess of smaller particles together.
This is a really great experiment. It's nice to see real work being done on the ground with these kinds of tests and write-ups. I am not a physicist but I imagine this could have implications for gravitational wave detection by improving LIGO's optical sensors, maybe optical sensors in general?
Or maybe this could help with tracking time more accurately? Hopefully someone with knowledge can chime in with what this means in practice.
I don't believe the LIGO experiment is utilizing entangled photons. This experiment is using a very different type of interferometer because they're trying to be sensitive to rotations, whereas LIGO's interferometer is for measuring changes in length. LIGO's biggest problem is how to minimize losses in their mirrors.
LIGO could potentially utilise EPR entanglement between photons in different parts of the detector but it does not do so yet. That’s a potential future development. It does use quantum squeezing though
This line of reasoning that LLMs "only predict" the next token is akin to saying humans can only think or speak one word at a time. Yes, we use one token/word at a time, but it is the aggregate thought that matters, regardless of what underlies it.
I think the mistake people make is assuming that "probability" is a simple concept.
If there are 50K possible tokens and I don't have any other information, I could make a naive estimate that every token has equal probability and start generating text that is just gibberish. With the simple single-token Markov-chain example I would estimate probabilities based the previous token, and that probability estimate would be much better. If you use it for generating text it will look like something that is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike human speech. [1]
The difference lies entirely in how accurately you model the world and what information you have available when estimating probabilities. Models like GPT4 happen to be very good at it because they encode a huge amount of knowledge about the world and take a lot of context into account when estimating the probability. That's not something to be taken lightly.
I am skeptical anyone saying this is making a mistake: it only ever really comes up when someone has specific priors they're wanting to litigate - best summarized by the timeless: you cannot make a man understand something when his paycheque depends on his not understanding it.
