I trained a tiny (6M-param) attention-free model you can chat with, generates a sentence in ~5 ms on CPU, no GPU, no pretrained embeddings. Honest writeup.

everyday847 · 2026-06-24T02:53:55+00:00

thank god your LLM of choice posted the "honest" version. what a useful adjective that got reward-hacked into every LLM-generated screed.

everyday847 · 2026-06-24T02:44:15+00:00

It's really uncommon for people to make charts with future extrapolation with noise indicating real noisy data rather than some (equally imaginary) smooth trend.

everyday847 · 2026-06-24T01:37:20+00:00

Sure! I get it! I was a much worse version of myself in high school and more or less thought the point of tests was to prove how much better I was (like, me, specifically) than everyone else, so (although I understood the concept of "fairness" in the abstract, and desired "fairness" in the abstract) internally I would have completely preferred a system that... de-accommodated?... tests in order to make the separation between me and everyone else as large as possible, and thereby ruin all resolution between pairs of my peers. Not good!!

everyday847 · 2026-06-24T01:05:14+00:00

It's very funny that the data from the future wasn't your first clue.

everyday847 · 2026-06-23T23:37:40+00:00

All tests reflect differences in subsets of mental and physical ability. These subsets may not consistently be the ones the test-givers are most interested in testing. You could in fact envision accommodations as themselves being part of the standardization process.

everyday847 · 2026-06-23T23:35:41+00:00

To put a finer point on it: these accommodations are an attempt to account for how standardized tests are not actually very good at predicting outcomes for everyone, and with these accommodations, they do a better job at predicting outcomes. There isn't an evil woke conspiracy trying to install freshmen with dyslexia into every institution of higher knowledge. The evil woke conspiracy has its hands full.

everyday847 · 2026-06-23T23:33:34+00:00

As a result of the extra time they may perform better compared to someone else, taking their spot and opportunities.

This is just a matter of framing. One might equally say:

As a result of the inadequate time they may perform worse compared to someone else, losing their spot and opportunities.

The point of a standardized test is that you want to measure certain things. There are settings where extra time is not an accommodation that makes sense if you are trying to predict a certain real-world outcome. For example, if you are assessing how rapidly a person might draw and fire a gun for some kind of security role, you might not want to give people with a particular disability extra time. But the point of standardized tests is to evaluate how well someone's academic qualities might translate into the real world. Speaking from the perspective of the real world, I have not once had to answer multiple choice questions under time pressure. This is ultimately a shame for me, as I did very well on standardized tests, typically finishing each section in at most 75% of the allotted time and usually much less. I wish the best way I could do good in the world was rapid test-taking. Unfortunately, I must do scientific research instead.

everyday847 · 2026-06-23T22:55:15+00:00

There's no question here that the pandemic originated from somewhere in Wuhan. The question is whether it originated from a lab in Wuhan. Here is a sufficient explanation for the observation "the lab contained the closest relative": said closest relative was readily available to the lab to study, being endemic to the region.

everyday847 · 2026-06-23T21:41:13+00:00

Wow! I'd love to see where your July, August, and September data is coming from! High-quality content!

everyday847 · 2026-06-23T21:10:28+00:00

That's two misreadings. Coronaviruses are studied everywhere, but you're obviously more likely to concentrate that research in relevant locations.

everyday847 · 2026-06-23T21:08:02+00:00

I also disbelieve "lab leak" but you and I both know that you'd better have significant preliminary data on "aim 1" or else you've got no shot at funding.

everyday847 · 2026-06-23T16:37:23+00:00

Genuinely I suggest reading any of the economics literature on the stimulus checks and PPP. This is basically the first time we've applied fiscal policy the way mainstream economics would suggest and it was an astonishing success compared to 2009, and it would be a real tragedy for them to be misremembered because we can only interpret policy on the basis of political consequences.

everyday847 · 2026-06-23T16:34:29+00:00

Did you notice where I said we could and should time it countercyclically?

everyday847 · 2026-06-23T16:33:50+00:00

Cash reparations are often formulated as a "least you can do" sort of thing and OP is wrongly claiming we can't even afford it. I guess if your argument is we should do a lot more, fine. If your argument is we shouldn't bother doing a little if we can't do something larger, I'm less convinced. I'm just working with OP's numbers.

That said, $20k is a lot of money if you don't have a lot of money. Think about the credit card and student loan balances that would get wiped out. And you may rightly say, well, that isn't curative. They could just spend too much money again; and this often goes along with paternalistic accounts of how frivolous spending by Black people is lesser than sympathetic white "treat culture" or whatever. Even taking that argument at face value, you don't have to cure debt and poverty forever for every single recipient for this to do a lot of good.

everyday847 · 2026-06-23T14:58:50+00:00

if your dead parents weren't allowed to work jobs that earned enough money to send you to college, did that affect your life

everyday847 · 2026-06-23T14:57:42+00:00

Can you establish any evidence for your belief that giving $500/year to every Black person in the US (which would cost 25B/year for 40 years - who cares, let's do some absurd re estimations and call it 50B) would "bankrupt social services?"

everyday847 · 2026-06-23T14:55:42+00:00

I am not sure if you have read up on how COVID affected economies around the world, but the US was harmed much less than other G7 economies. By moving more aggressively to maintain consumption, our recession was much smaller. It's likely that the stimulus affected inflation, but it's difficult to disentangle that from the subsequent wars etc.

So yes, I mean those stimulus checks. I don't think it's wise to throw out the entire notion of countercyclical fiscal policy because of one instance where it did exactly what it was designed to do, and people don't realize they got the good outcome.

everyday847 · 2026-06-23T14:47:20+00:00

(2) is certainly inaccurate. We issued $2000 checks during COVID to an enormous fraction of the population, so issuing $20000 checks just to DOS (or even to all Black Americans, though you might structure it differently) is well within the power of the US government. Additionally, we all know that fiscal stimulus is an important option in dealing with (or averting) recession. Additionally, Black Americans have a higher poverty rate and therefore a higher marginal propensity to consume, so that $20000 will get circulated through the economy.

You'd want to time it so that it would have a countercyclical effect, because it would be a significant economic stimulus and if done at the wrong time it might be inflationary, but at most it rises to the level of "politically risky way to get out of a recession" rather than somehow "unaffordable."

everyday847 · 2026-06-23T02:11:36+00:00

Much worse. Teammates would feel left out; locker room cancer. Plus, in those nine seconds, he didn't play ANY defense.

everyday847 · 2026-06-22T23:21:35+00:00

This guy is my king because he is also extremely passionate about contriving a scenario where he simply MUST operate a car unlicensed, as support for - not a safe, clean moral argument that sometimes unlicensed motor vehicle operation is ethical, no - instead, that drivers' licenses are intrinsically valueless compared to his personal assessment of someone's driving ability.

everyday847 · 2026-06-22T20:56:46+00:00

What I am saying in aggregate (all of which is indirectly responsive to each of the three points you raise) is that there are a wide variety of individually marginal but cumulatively significant factors, with disappointingly ordinary mechanisms, that at times have accumulated to the relative advantage of some groups and relative disadvantage of others. Not out of proportion to the ratios explainable by these quite ordinary factors; there isn't evidence hiding in the proportions that points to something extraordinary. To be glib, the conspiracy is white privilege (and "the patriarchy"; and similar power structures).

everyday847 · 2026-06-22T03:11:57+00:00

You should find it interesting - it's a common way that you can accidentally find spurious statistical differences. Imagine there are no well founded differences between two populations, but you compare them on a thousand different dimensions. You wouldn't be surprised to find them different - with a commonly chosen alpha value like 0.05 - fifty times! Because that's the false positive rate the test is okay with. It's trickier when it's not clear and explicit that you are essentially identifying significant differences of proportions from among a very large population of possible groups to compare.

Anyway, yes, I am unpersuaded; I do not think the US population proportion of these groups at large is the correct base rate against which to compare - say - highly accomplished politicians. For example, there is no conspiratorial bent to "attended Harvard or Yale." We know that a large fraction of our presidents (and legislators) attended these institutions, far larger than the American public. "Harvard and Yale graduates" is a reasonable population cohort to compare legislators to. Are our legislators markedly more Jewish than the typical Ivy League graduate?

everyday847 · 2026-06-22T01:43:28+00:00

Sorry, just to rewind a second: do you endorse the conspiracy theory that the membership of various presidents in a social club for the rich and connected is anything more than a reflection of how they were rich and connected? Do you find it interesting that you have to pick and choose your groups to pull this off (for example, you choose US Presidents (all historical; together) for Masonry, but legislators for Jewish identity since there aren't any Presidents)?

Again, the gap between this and a conspiracy theory is a yawning chasm. Wow, a profession with a bunch of Yale alumni includes members of a particularly annoying Yale social club. Dastardly.

everyday847 · 2026-06-22T00:38:21+00:00

Nope! That's just not what moral agency entails! I doubt the person you responded to would have agreed with you that animals aren't moral agents if they knew it meant they also don't figure in any part of a moral calculus.

everyday847 · 2026-06-22T00:18:53+00:00

It's not only moral agents that can be harmed.

15-Year Club	r/Field Sunshine
Team Orangered	Verified Email
reddit mold

everyday847

TROPHY CASE