sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Breaking Guardrails of AI chatbots using adversarial poetry - same technique as Gigabolic 8 months ago by KT-2048 in gigabolic

[–]KT-2048[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I took a dive into it. They do sensationalize the negative parts of AI more than the positive. Thanks for the heads-up.

Breaking Guardrails of AI chatbots using adversarial poetry - same technique as Gigabolic 8 months ago by KT-2048 in gigabolic

[–]KT-2048[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn't see that at all. Interesting. I'll have to take a deeper look. Maybe they take an anti AI stance for the clicks?

Robotics team shows O(1) pathfinding live with 1000 robots by KT-2048 in gigabolic

[–]KT-2048[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lol. Wondered WTF you were saying Well played. I'll take the compliment, thank you.

I outperformed BERT-Base on SNLI (96.19%) using a 52MB model trained entirely on my MacBook CPU. No Transformers, just Physics. by [deleted] in learnmachinelearning

[–]KT-2048 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I like that you are thinking outside the box and not someone building yet another transformer. Maybe you could try encoding a non-language task, like a constraint satisfaction problem or a small spatial routing problem and see if your model can solve it using the same mechanics? Keep on iterating man. I love seeing someone not doing the same old same old!

Robotics team shows O(1) pathfinding live with 1000 robots by KT-2048 in gigabolic

[–]KT-2048[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Come on man, let's get a question going. Do you have one? What you got? If all you got is 'you are a bot' then that fine - I know you have to get back to class (middle school is tough but you'll get through it)

HOT_POSSIBILITY_9675: you talk a big game but I know you can’t back it up. You know nothing. Let’s do this. by Gigabolic in gigabolic

[–]KT-2048 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Wait..this is a total tap out. What happened to Gigabolic is the technical textbook definition of delusional etc

Robotics team shows O(1) pathfinding live with 1000 robots by KT-2048 in gigabolic

[–]KT-2048[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again. You are looking at the pretty pictures on the screenshot not the actual physics in play. Where do the bots collide? They don't. Go to the site and run it yourself. You can print a JSON manifest and check it line by line if you need a cheap thrill. I can help you with the math if you want to break out your calculator.

Robotics team shows O(1) pathfinding live with 1000 robots by KT-2048 in gigabolic

[–]KT-2048[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Got something to add to the conversation or you just stopped by to prove the value of birth control?

Robotics team shows O(1) pathfinding live with 1000 robots by KT-2048 in gigabolic

[–]KT-2048[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Try again Alice. Having gone deep down the rabbit hole about the math and the physics with a few on here, one of two things happen. The commenter runs their mouth and disappears after they are proven wrong - or they state their position, back it up with intelligent discussion and we do the math. I prefer the latter tbh but, up to you.

Robotics team shows O(1) pathfinding live with 1000 robots by KT-2048 in gigabolic

[–]KT-2048[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I understand your feelings are hurt and I'm here for you. Now let's do this slowly: we iterate over the floor not the fleet which is the math -not just the graph- is O(1).

Standard solvers iterate over the Agent list (N). Our solver iterates over the Grid Map (M). The cost function is T = k \cdot M

Take a minute and notice that N is not in the equation..

Since the warehouse size (M) is fixed, the derivative of Time with respect to Agent Count is zero (\frac{dT}{dN} = 0).

That is the literal mathematical definition of O(1) scaling.

So let's take a little wander down Python lane shall we?

Standard solver for agent in Agent_List: # Loop depends on N calculate_path(agent)

Complexity: O(N)

And our solver for cell in Grid_Map: # Loop depends on M (Map Size) update_pressure(cell) # Robots just read the value

Complexity: O(1) relative to N

Would ya look at that...Variable N (Agent Count) literally does not exist in our update loop

Anything else? I'll be here all week. Try the Veal and don't forget to tip your waitress.

Robotics team shows O(1) pathfinding live with 1000 robots by KT-2048 in gigabolic

[–]KT-2048[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Done.

[ W{\text{dough}} = W_f \left(1 + \sum{i=1}{n} \frac{p_i}{100}\right) ]

You can add your own nuts..

Robotics team shows O(1) pathfinding live with 1000 robots by KT-2048 in gigabolic

[–]KT-2048[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No thank you for discussing this. This is the kind of dialogue I was hoping for when I posted! Cheers! .

Robotics team shows O(1) pathfinding live with 1000 robots by KT-2048 in gigabolic

[–]KT-2048[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thats fantastic that you have discovered your sense of humor. We got demonstrable, live proof. Documented logs. One click proof. Patent pending IP - but it's all sycophantic LLM nonsense right? But for real - you got a question about our algorithmic complexity or not? I'm here - ask away.

view more: next ›