If the question is things “only” old people say, you have to exclude phrases old people say that were repopularized through media.
“Heavy” (meaning important, grave)
For example this is a really quotable line from Back to the Future, so kids would pick it up.
Yea not serious.
Authority means force.
Your dentist does not have the ability, to force you to do anything. They are an “authority” in the sense they know a lot about teeth so we willingly ask them for help.
That is clearly not the same type of authority being discussed in authoritarianism.
Stop comparing Hitler to your dentist.
What? Take the discussion seriously.
We don’t confer power to them. I am the authority and I consent to the dentist cleaning my teeth but the second I say “no” their ability to operate is taken away.
Try telling “no” to a cop trying to arrest you.
A dentist has no authority over you. If you choose not to brush your teeth they can’t force you to, they can’t do dental work unless you willingly seek them put and consent.
A plumber has not authority to enter your home or mess with your plumbing unless you invite them in.
You’re misusing the word “authority” and applying it out of context.
This is entirely correct, and it’s deeply troubling seeing the general public use LLMs for confirmation bias because they don’t understand anything about them.
People aren’t interested in “learning about LLMs”, especially people like artists.
They’re interested in telling Elon Musk to “fuck off”, and when Grok says something bad about Elon it’s very cathartic for them.
They might know it’s feeding their own thoughts back to them, but they don’t care. To people who aren’t in the know, this box Elon is promoting as “objective truth box” is criticizing Elon. That’s a very powerful narrative in a world where he’s taking over the world.
It’s hard to disagree. Elon can go fuck himself. What’s more important to the average person, stopping Elon or understanding the nitty gritty of machine learning?
When artists say AI is stealing, they’re not interested in an explanation about how “its really not”. And if you tried to, they’d feel you’re missing the forest for the trees because their problem with AI isn’t metaphysical philosophy, it’s that it’s hurting their job opportunities.
Where do you get the real data, though? They just scrap data from websites
Great question… Do they “just” scrape data from websites?
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2025/03/libgen-meta-openai/682093/
Keeping it clean would require hiring people to scrub contamination from the data sets.
That’s exactly right.
The point I was trying to raise that wasn’t semantics was that if the majority of the full training data were synthetic, it could lead to model collapse.
But luckily (or not?) a small amount of finetuning can be very effective in correcting the range of responses.
Open LLMs are finetuned on partially or fully synthetic data all the time
That’s what I was suggesting.
You explained to me you weren’t talking about “finetuning”, but training on completely synthetic data.
(Fine-tuning happens after the LLM has already been trained)
Oh, yeah then I agree with above commenter. This would collapse the model.
You’re not training an LLM on text generated by an LLM. You’re training it on 98% real data, and intentionally biasing it by sprinkling in the fake data intermittently.
Haha fair, that fits the definition of Lost-like, but I was thinking of that narrow era of network mystery boxes that popped up in the immediate aftermath of Lost chasing its success.
No matter how good they were, none of them were Lost so they got canceled. (Except for Fringe thank god)
From at least gets to live outside that shadow.
Ah yes, the Lost-likes.
Manifest, Fast Forward, Continuum, Revolution, Terra Nova… loved them all. All of them canceled.
The Man from Earth
B4
Triangle
Time Lapse
Daybreakers
Evolution
Knowing
You can get better at IQ tests by doing more of them and learning the patterns, right?
Yes. That is considered to “invalidate” an IQ test, but it’s not usually an issue since the tests are typically administered to children.
IQ tests are basically only used in the context of individualized education plans for young school children (or for MENSA membership).
So it’s basically measuring how au fair you are with logic puzzles rather than anything particularly intrinsic.
The fundamental issue of testing is that no test can objectively determine intrinsic properties.
But no, a full IQ test done by a psychologist tests a lot more than “puzzles”, including things like memory tests and even fine motor skills or hand eye coordination.
When I was tested they found I scored really high in the pattern recognition stuff and memory tests, but my writing was slow and sloppy and below average.
As part of my individualized education plan I was allowed extra time on tests as well as study aids such as text to speech tools because of this.
The ultimate purpose of the IQ tests is to get a general idea of the strengths and weaknesses in certain area.
Excellent memory, and quick intuitive problem solving, like in my case, can compensate and mask ADHD symptoms like trouble focusing. These tests helped reveal that at an early age.
I think a lot of people think of IQ tests like they’re “how objectively smart are you” when really they’re used to find out which areas you need help in with your education/life so we can provide kids with that support.
I don’t think you’d want to go into the future after the point time travel was invented because then other time travellers will have been messing with the timeline back and forth a million ways.
Lmao, k