> it's not like china they making cars or batteries or chips by hand
That was true a while back but less so now. Chinese companies are moving to "dark factories", which can function autonomously without humans (hence no need for lighting).
I burst out laughing when I read the following excerpts, one after the other:
> The measurements of the costs of health impairing pollution depends on the foregone earnings from increased morbidity and mortality.
> ...
> I've always thought that under-populated countries in Africa are vastly UNDER-polluted, their air quality is probably vastly inefficiently low compared to Los Angeles or Mexico City. Only the lamentable facts that so much pollution is generated by non-tradable industries (transport, electrical generation) and that the unit transport costs of solid waste are so high prevent world welfare enhancing trade in air pollution and waste.
It's obvious to me that this is an argumentum ad absurdum indictment of the way the "cost" of pollution is calculated. It has about as much subtlety as "why don't we eat the starving Irish kids?", although its form differs from A Modest Proposal.
If he didn't also hang out with a paedophile and argue that women are biologically bad at science, he'd be a funny guy.
I appreciate that I'm not the only person here seeing this and I think the last part of your comment is what some people are missing here. He can be a misogynist pedophile and still make funny jokes sometimes and it's weirdly reductive to pretend otherwise.
I thought his emails to Esptein asking for dating advice about how to "get horizontal" with the "yellow peril" were particularly cringe. “Think for now I’m going nowhere with her except economics mentor” ... poor guy!
“She must be very confused or maybe wants to cut me off but wants professional connection a lot and so holds to it,” Summers wrote in a March 2019 exchange to Epstein
You're covered in the "cartoon-villain-tears-down-orphanage-to-build-mall view of how people work" part of my comment. If this memo were published verbatim under an Onion header maybe it would read clearer to more people.
> You're covered in the "cartoon-villain-tears-down-orphanage-to-build-mall view of how people work" part of my comment. If this memo were published verbatim under an Onion header maybe it would read clearer to more people.
Yes, it would in that context make sense as something akin to A Modest Proposal, but directed at the World Bank's liberalization policies.
The problem, of course, is that Summers was not an opponent of the World Bank's liberalization policies, he was the chief economist of the World Bank, and a supporter of those policies, and actively seeking stronger support for them, so it doesn't work that way coming from him.
Question #1 was on the model's ability to handle arithmetic. The answer to question seems to be unrelated, at least to me: "you can enable or disable tool use in most APIs".
The original question still stands: do recent LLMs have an inherent knowledge of arithmetic, or do they have to offload the calculation to some other non-LLM system?
The knowledge was never the bottleneck for that, not since the days of GPT-3. The ability to execute on it was.
Which includes, among other things, the underappreciated metacognitive skill of "being able to decide when to do math quick and dirty, in one forward pass, and when to write it out explicitly and solve it step by step".
Today's frontier LLMs can do that. A lot of training for "reasoning" is just training for "execute on your knowledge reliably". They usually can solve math problems with no tool calls. But they will tool call for more complex math when given an option to.
Some nice charts here [0], which IMO means LLMs are getting very good at guessing answers to certain arithmetic operations, but they don't actually perform it in a logical fashion.
Mostly true but the exception is K-Pop, which as I understand was the creation of a project by the South eKorean government. There was a severe financial crisis in the late 1990s where the country almost went bankrupt. Desperately seeking sources of revenue, the government funded K-Pop groups which eventually become a global phenomenon (BTS et al). At least that is what some Koreans have told me.
I think that’s what’s being implied by creating. Whatever people create and is allowed (or tweaked by) under a repressive regime that is. The government sets the guidelines and censorship and the subsequent content has some peculiar characteristics of the government policies.
I am Korean, and what you are saying is a lie created by anti-Korean people in Japan. Do you really think it makes sense for a government experiencing an economic crisis to desperately seek revenue sources and hope to overcome the crisis by funding a cultural industry that hasn't even succeeded yet?
I've always wondered about this, turns out there's a wikipedia entry for it
> To protect the South Korean culture industry, the South Korean Ministry of Culture received a substantial budget increase, allowing for the creation of hundreds of culture industry departments in universities nationwide.[21] It has justified its financial support for Hallyu, estimated to be worth US$83.2 billion in 2012, by linking it to South Korea's export-driven economy.[22]
It's completely different to say that the government took the lead in an industry that didn't exist before and to say that it provided support to an already successful industry. Of course, what I said was wrong refers to the former. In fact, the government supports all industries to some extent, so that can't be a label.
I think it will be a temporary phenomenon. Tiktok people arrived on RedNote last week and were jaw-droppingly amazed at videos of flashy modern Chinese cities, natural wonders (Guilin mountains), beautifully dressed young men and women, tasty food, Luigi fandom, and cute cats.
For many it was a revelation that the US government/media complex has been systematically lying to them about China. They are arriving at an acceptance that the US is a shabby declining empire dominated by a corrupt elite and heartless broligarchs. Always a good thing to bump up against reality, imho.
However I think that the US-based population of Tiktok refugees will subside once the novelty effect has worn off. Probably shrink by half in a month. Hopefully there will remain a positive lingering effect.
> many it was a revelation that the US government/media complex has been systematically lying to them about China.
The rational and data-based take is that the CCP censors negative content about China on Red Book. See [1], [2] and [3] from David Zhang, and you can verify this on your own.
> They are arriving at an acceptance that the US is a shabby declining empire dominated by a corrupt elite and heartless broligarchs. Always a good thing to bump up against reality, imho.
Try making this comment about China in Red Book and see how long it lasts.
Can you post a video about use of gutter oil in China on Red Book? You can post a video about drug use in SF on Twitter and not get banned.
> If China is so developed, why does it fight for developing nation status?
Because overall, China is still much poorer than the developed world (Western Europe, USA, Japan, etc.).
China has some amazing infrastructure and beautiful cities, and many cities, like Shanghai, Beijing and Shenzhen, are now quite developed, but on the whole, the country still has a ways to go.
> The rational and data-based take is that the CCP censors negative content about China on Red Book. [...] Can you post a video about use of gutter oil in China on Red Book?
There is heavy censorship in China, but there's also heavy propaganda about China in the US. Case in point: the videos you linked to come from Falun Gong media, run by a Scientology-like cult that somehow has tons of money (maybe from a 3-letter agency) to spread their own propaganda in the US.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ArtificialInteligence/comments/1jci...