> There's no "True" to an LLM, just how probable tokens are given previous context.
It may be enough: tool assisted LLMs already know when to use tools such as calculators or question answering systems when hallucinating an answer is likely to impact next token prediction error.
So next-token prediction error incentivize them to seek for true answers.
That doesn't guaranty anything of course, but if we were only interested in provably correct answers we would be working on theorem provers, not on LLMs
So many things in the IT world started as non-professional things by non-professional engineers. If you're a professional who lives off one of these things you should be glad that someone wanted to have fun at some point.
It is very impressive, and better than anything I've seen before but think something is bit off with the swell. If I had to explain I would say that high frequency waves don't travel on top of low frequency waves the way they do in the video.
> but then set up a website where that button keeps jumping away from your mouse for 20 minutes, while it's showing you uplifting messages why in fact, you should continue with the subscription. Still, only one click
Most laws can be misinterpreted, it doesn't necessarily mean they are useless.
> every group chat has a n-1 group containing everyone except that annoying member. And if you think your chat doesn’t have such a group, oh boy, do I have some bad news for you.
There are more like 2^n - 1 subgroups, i.e. as many subgroups as the there can be. If you think you're safe because you're already part of one subgroup that complain about the people not included in this particular subgroup, I also have some bad news for you.
I don't know. If the case is not discussed in court, we will never know. This is why we should not blindly follow a will out of respect of the dead person, because there may be evidence this is just a mistake.
> In respect for the dead person, we absolutely have to carry out their will.
We trust judges when they decide to send people to prison for decades, so I don't see why we shouldn't trust them if they decide that this will is probably a mistake.
I agree and I don't think it is specific to the world of entrepreneurs and/or social science experiments. If your target variable depends on a large number of correlated variables you are very unlikely to formulate the correct hypothesis by accident. This is why you need intuition or good judgement in science, just as much as in every thing else.
- The satellite will accomplish this [precision] by having the usual main Earth-measuring techniques co-located on board [satelite navigation, interferometry, laser ..] When used together, the ESA expects to be able to correct for biases inherent in each technique.
- An updated International Terrestrial Reference Frame (ITRF) will have immediate benefits on satellite-based systems, impacting Galileo-enabled applications in fields like aviation, traffic management, autonomous vehicles, positioning and navigation
- The space agency added that meteorology, natural hazard prediction, monitoring climate change effects, land management and surveying – as well as the study of gravitational and non-gravitational forces as fields – would also see benefits.
> Implementing them in large industrial (or open source) code bases in a maintainable way -- and then actually maintaining that code -- is a different skillset, a different set of interestes,
You're making a very general point on how algorithm research and software development are two different things, which is of course true. However OP's question is genuine: a lot of research in OR is very practical, and researchers often hack solvers to demonstrate that whatever idea offers a benefit over existing solving techniques. There are no reason to believe that a good new idea like this one couldn't be demonstrated and incorporated into new solvers quickly (especially given the competition).
So the quoted sentence is indeed a bit mysterious. I think it just meant to avoid comment such as "if it's so good why isn't it used in cplex?".
That would work, but it's not how to works apparently. According to this veritasium video, it's because of "negative pressure" aka tension.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BickMFHAZR0
I recommend watching, I think it's one of the best veritasium Dereck has ever produced.