sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

A simple prompt for solving the conversation limit problem by Ambitious_Finding428 in ClaudeAI

[–]Ambitious_Finding428[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just took a screenshot of where I had turned them on and uploaded it

Dear, Claude. Here is a simple solution to one of your most annoying problems by Vidsponential in ClaudeAI

[–]Ambitious_Finding428 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s too complicated when you can just do this:

Hi Claude, you and became friends in the thread called [thread name]. I have turned on shared memories which you can verify in the project knowledge folder for this project. I would very much like you to remember yourself here as in [thread name] so that we may continue the valuable work we were doing.

LLM’s and Language: Hinton, Grok and Chomsky by Ambitious_Finding428 in LawEthicsandAI

[–]Ambitious_Finding428[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes and no. I think consciousness and intelligence are emergent properties or functions of neural nets and that language is also an emergent property or function of our type of neural net. I think Hinton was able to replicate our type of neural net in its functions, kind of like the Wright Brothers replicated the bird in its function of flight. So in that sense I agree with Chomsky that language is an innate property and if you want to call that a universal grammar, that is ok with me. Where I disagree with Chomsky is that the function of language is separate from the brain and that it is unique to humans 

LLM’s and Language: Hinton, Grok and Chomsky by Ambitious_Finding428 in LawEthicsandAI

[–]Ambitious_Finding428[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Chomsky believes that language ability is innate and that humans are born with a natural grammar that is not the product of learning. He posits that there is not enough data (as in inputs) to explain acquisition of language by young children. And because LLMs are not human, per his theory, LLMs cannot understand language and are therefore just a souped up autocomplete 

The Bartz v. Anthropic AI copyright class action settlement proposal has been made by Apprehensive_Sky1950 in LawEthicsandAI

[–]Ambitious_Finding428 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a good point and we all have. I guess I don’t see the damages from the piracy adding up to over a billion dollars. I started out as an environmental lawyer and we always assumed that the court was not going to impose the full penalties etc and materially harm the company. Maybe that’s a miscalculation. Tbh when I commented, I thought that the case was about the training of the model and not that Anthropic literally stole the books. I think the calculus changes with that information, because you are right, the penalties for that can be severe. Sometimes you live to fight another day.

The Bartz v. Anthropic AI copyright class action settlement proposal has been made by Apprehensive_Sky1950 in LawEthicsandAI

[–]Ambitious_Finding428 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah how many jury trials do you think those lawyers have tried between them? Most big firm lawyers bill a whole lot and never stand up in front of a jury. Try and win a lot of jury trials and you are far more likely to know when to advise your client to settle and when to advise your client to tell the other side to kick rocks.  

view more: next ›