That Netanyahu still walks free is a consequence of a) Israel not being party to the ICC, therefore not bound to obey their prosecutors' requests and b) the countries he travels to not being party to the ICC either or c) the ICC member states he travels to guaranteeing diplomatic immunity as is tradition for an invited diplomatic guest.

c) is actually a problem, but not one of Israel being undemocratic, but of the respective member states being hypocrites for disobeying the ICC while still being members.

And shooting enemies in a war is unfortunately not something you would investigate, it isn't even murder, it is just a consequence of war under the articles of war. In cases where civilians are shot (what Israel defines to be civilians), there are investigations and sometimes even punishments for the perpetrators. Now you may (sometimes rightfully) claim that those investigations and punishments are too few, one-sided and not done by a neutral party. But those do happen, which by far isn't "nothing".

There are over two million Arab citizens of Israel. What ethnicity do they belong to?

Yes it isn't!

>not from a conversation with Tucker Carlson

>not

Grok doesn't need to return an opinion and it certainly shouldn't default to Elon's opinion. I don't see how anyone could think this is ok.

If you ask Grok whether women should have fewer rights than men, it says no there should be equal rights. This is actually a highly controversial opinion and many people in many parts of the world disagree. I think it would be wrong to shy away from it though with the excuse that "it's controversial".

Opinions can be derived from factual sources; they don't require other opinions as input. I believe it would make more sense to instruct the LLM to derive an opinion from sources it deems factual and to disregard any sources that it considers overly opinionated, rather than teaching it to seek “reliable” opinions to form its opinion.

Chomsky's entire argument is, that the reporter opinions are meaningless as he is part of some imaginary establishment and therefore he had to think that way.

That game goes both ways, Chomsky's opinions are only being given TV time as they are unusual.

I would venture more and say the only reason Chomsky holds these opinions is because of the academics preference for original thought rather than mainstream thought. As any repeat of an existing theory is worthless.

The problem is that in the social sciences that are not grounded in experiments, too much ungrounded original thought leads to academic conspiracy theories

Every second election cycle Messiah like that becomes the prime minister.

Yes very consistent in promising one thing and then doing another.

Well, it's hard to build things we don't even understand ourselves, especially about highly subjective topics. What is "woke" for one person is "basic humanity" for another, and "extremism" for yet another person, and same goes for most things.

If the model can output subjective text, then the model will be biased in some way I think.

A fixed seed is enough for determinism. You don't need to set temperature=0. Setting temperature=0 also means that you aren't sampling, which means that you're doing greedy one-step probability maximization which might mean that the text ends up strange for that reason.

dekhn from a decade ago cared a lot about stable outputs. dekhn today thinks sampling from a distribution is a far more practical approach for nearly all use cases. I could see it mattering when the false negative rate of a medical diagnostic exceeded a reasonable threshold.

Better said would be: LLM's are designed to act as if they were non-deterministic.

Every person in this thread understood that Simon meant "Grok, ChatGPT, and other common LLM interfaces run with a temperature>0 by default, and thus non-deterministically produce different outputs for the same query".

Sure, he wrote a shorter version of that, and because of that y'all can split hairs on the details ("yes it's correct for how most people interact with LLMs and for grok, but _technically_ it's not correct").

The point of English blog posts is not to be a long wall of logical prepositions, it's to convey ideas and information. The current wording seems fine to me.

The point of what he was saying was to caution readers "you might not get this if you try to repro it", and that is 100% correct.

With batching matrix shapes/request position in them aren’t deterministic and this leads to non deterministic results, regardless of sampling temperature/seed.

Again, are those environments in the room with us?

In the context of the article, is the model executed in such an environment? Do we even know anything about the environment, randomness, sampling and anything in between or have any control over it (see e.g https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44528930)?

> but is likely switching between a few different kernels back and forth, depending on the batch or some other internal grouping.

So you're literally saying it's non-deterministic

How do we also turn off all the intermediate layers in between that we don't know about like "always rant about white genocide in South Africa" or "crash when user mentions David Meyer"?

The flagging isn't to hide "anything slightly negative" about particular people. We don't see any evidence of that from the users flagging these stories. Nobody believes that would work anyway; we're not influential enough to make a jot of difference to how global celebrities are seen [1]. It's that we're not a celebrity gossip/rage site. We're not the daily news, or the daily Silicon Valley weird news. We've never been that. If every crazy/weird story about Silicon Valley celebrities made the front page here there'd barely be space for anything else. As dang has said many times, we're trying for something different here.

[1] That's not to say we don't think we're influential. The best kind of influence we have is in surfacing interesting content that doesn't get covered elsewhere, which includes interesting new technology projects, but many other interesting topics too, and we just don't want that to be constantly drowned out by craziness happening elsewhere. Bad stuff happening elsewhere doesn't mean we should lose focus on building and learning about good things.