It's a very conservative warning. The application does not perform writes, so the application doesn't actually wear your SSD at all. The rest is just application-independent general hygiene.
You still have a core misunderstanding. Only one layer of weights is required in memory at a time. A forward pass can be over-simplified as a matrix multiplication of each layer, one at a time.
There is no swapping of working RAM. We're just talking about loading the weights read-only data into RAM on-demand for each layer. It is only as slow as your storage interface.
Both sentences are likely wrong. It's a written lifespan (technically an "erased" one), not a read lifespan. The weights are only needed from disk read-only. And Mac NVMe interfaces are surprisingly fast.
Edit: Oh, I think you maybe thought I meant swapping working RAM off disk? I didn't. I meant swapping weights off disk into RAM on-demand.
I've got access to a 192GB RAM Mac Studio, which is below the stated minimum RAM. Can swapping off fast disk be used to make it work out, especially since it's MoE?
ChatGPT reconstructing idiomatic Python source code from Python bytecode was definitely up there. That is not something humans have written a great deal about online. It requires simulating the Python VM.
I remember also having a massive wtf reaction to realizing that original ChatGPT was pretty good at decoding long random/unique base64 strings.
> If it detected any harmonics it would be too high.
I think it's not that simple. A tuner is "hearing" the fundamental and all of the harmonic overtones combined. It has to guess at which frequency is the fundamental, even if the overtones are actually stronger than it amplitude-wise, and it does that by looking at the nature of the repeating overtone pattern and extrapolating back to the fundamental.
I think you can end up an octave too low (half the actual frequency) if the waveform repeats in a way that implies a different overtone repetition pattern, for example if there's an every-other-cycle artifact to the waveform.
Inference (not training) is bottlenecked by memory access speed, not compute. Having special hardware wouldn't make it faster unless you somehow found a faster memory controller than the GPU has.
I don't agree with the "twice". A frequently performed manipulation like the fuel cutoff (usually performed after landing) collapses down to a single intention that is carried out by muscle memory, not two consciously selected actions.
I meant philosophical toggle switches, not physical ones. The gear can go between down and up. The fuel can go between run and cutoff. Given enough practice, the brain takes care of the physical actions that manipulate those philosophical toggles without conscious thought about performing them.
Sometimes? If you have enough altitude to trade for speed then after the cutoff you could glide to a hypothetical miraculously-placed runway right in front of you, vs. having fire quickly consume the entire plane if you don't cutoff..
It's not that rare, and there are institutional factors (such as seeking treatment for psychosis being career-ending for a pilot) that incentivize serious pilot mental health crises being untreated.
Not really, though. They're both (retracting the gear, and cutting off fuel) just toggle switches, as far as your brain's conscious mechanisms go. Doing them both on every flight dulls the part of your brain that cares about how they feel different to perform.
(I'm not strongly arguing against the murder scenario, just against the idea that it's impossible for it to be the confusion scenario.)
> There is no possible way to confuse these two actions.
This is obviously an overstatement. Any two regularly performed actions can be confused. Sometimes (when tired or distracted) I've walked into my bathroom intending to shave, but mistakenly brushed my teeth and left. My toothbrush and razor are not similar in function or placement.
I don't know that ChatGPT's voice mode is using audio as a transformer input directly.
It could just be using speech to text (e.g. Whisper) on your input, and then using its text model on the text of your words. Or has OpenAI said that they aren't doing this?
Then the malware would provide that confirmation to the wallet too. Defending yourself from malware running on the same (Windows) machine is mostly impossible.
You should try AI sometime. It's quite good, and can do things (like "analyze these 10000 functions and summarize what you found out about how this binary works, including adding comments everywhere) that individual humans do not scale to.
Previously: keybase.io, gittorrent.org at Recurse Center, VP of Engineering at FlightCar (YC W13), Linux kernel SD card subsystem maintainer.
https://printf.net/
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/cjb; my proof: https://keybase.io/cjb/sigs/r1jKbK2XHT3K67jMZN5eZydp5Y3bnwbrv7Eqkm1-wqU ]