• Szymon@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    I feel like naming something Q is about as tone deaf, or as much of a dog whistle, as making something have the acronym ISIS

      • Szymon@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        When a major cultural event occurs, symbols and words can be forced into new meanings in that society after having gone through the significant or traumatic event.

        The swastika, historically a symbol symbolizing representing well being and prosperity, now cannot be seen without associating it with hatred fascism.

        I think it’s relevant for a western country to consider the concept that “Q” can be interpreted in different ways than it was before but a significant number of people, and a large company should have something like that on their radar, especially for a marketing/branding perspective.

        • StormNinjaPenguin@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Well comparing Q to the swastika maybe reasonable on the basis on both of their background ideas being deranged to a similar degree, but the Q movement’s historical insignificance is just laughable in comparison.

          Blacklisting the letter Q because of a handful of dipshits that most of the world doesn’t even know about is preposterous.

  • duncesplayed@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    I’m curious about auto-regressive token prediction vs planning. The article just very briefly mentions “planning” and then never explains what it is. As someone who’s not in this area, what’s the definition/mechanism of “planning” here?

    • anachronist@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s extremely hard to separate out the actual technical terms from the hyperventilating booster lingo in this space. Unfortunately a lot of it is because there’s overlap. “Hallucination” is a well-defined technical term now, but it is also a booster term because it implies a consciousness that doesn’t exist.

      However this:

      machine that is able to reason about mathematics

      Is absolute bullshit.