You're ignorance is showing. The model does not change as it's used. Full stop. Like many other terms related to LLMs, "in context learning" is deeply misleading. Remove the wishful thinking and it boils down to "changes to the input cause changes to the output", which is obvious and not at all interesting.

People who care about facts and reality, not their preferred science-fiction delusion. I highlight the deterministic nature of the model proper and where the random element is introduced in the larger process to dispel some of the typical magical thinking you see from ignorant fools like you. The model does not and can not behave in the ways that morons like you image.

Do you get-off on humiliation? While some caching is done as an optimization, this has absolutely no effect on the output. Give the same input at any point to a completely different instance of the model and you'll get the exact same results.

LOL! You think that the model isn't deterministic? Again, the only thing the model does is produce a list of next-token probabilities. It does this deterministically. The only non-deterministic part here is the final token selection, which is done probabilistically.

That you believe otherwise suggests that you're either even more ignorant that even I thought possible, or you think that LLMs or NNs are magical. What a fucking joke you are.

The only one playing 'word games' here is you, ignorant troll.

He's not nice, but he's also not wrong. You have some very odd ideas about what LLMs do.

LLMs absolutely, without question, do not learn the way you seem to think they do. They do not learn from having conversations. They do not learn by being presented with text in a prompt, though if your experience is limited to chatbots could be forgiven for mistakenly thinking that was the case. Neural networks are not artificial brains. They have no mechanism by which they can 'learn by experience'. They 'learn' by having an external program modify their weights in response to the the difference between their output and the expected output for a given input.

It might also interest you to know than the model itself is completely deterministic. Given an input, it will always produce the same output. The trick is that the model doesn't actually produce a next token, but a list of probabilities for the next token. The actual token is selected probabilistically, which is why you'll get different responses despite the model being completely deterministic. The model retains no internal state, so you could pass the partial output to a completely different model and it wouldn't matter.

LLMs do not and can not reason, including so-called 'reasoning' models. The reason output improves when giving a 'step by step' response is because you end up with more relevant text in context. It really is that simple. Remember that each token is produced essentially in isolation. The model doesn't work out a solution first and carefully craft a response, it produces tokens one at a time, without retaining any internal state between them. Imagine a few hundred people writing a response where each person only sees the prompt and partial output on their turn and they can only suggest a few potential next words and their rank, the actual next word selected probabilistically. LLMs work a bit like that, but without the benefit of understanding.

I assure you that they do not. Not even a little bit.

You probably realize by now that this is just silly nonsense.

That's a very misleading term. The model isn't on mushrooms. (Remember that the model proper is completely deterministic.) A so-called 'hallucination' in an LLM's output just means that the output is factually incorrect. As LLMs do not operate on facts and concepts but on statistical relationships between tokens, there is no operational difference between a 'correct' response and a 'hallucination'. Both kinds of output are produced the same way, by the same process. A 'hallucination' isn't the model malfunctioning, but an entirely expected result of the model operating correctly.

A better way to learn. The more tactile feel of it combined with the accumulation of physical notes seems to be an improvement.

What I am wondering is if you have a stylus and also probably one of those gloves to keep you from smudging the screen how does that compare.

One thing I do know is that if you are really going to learn things you have to use them in a effective way. Basically you need projects that use the data and the learning. But having students do that versus just testing them on problems individually is very expensive and we don't like spending money on kids that aren't ours. It's really kind of an every man for himself world these days.

If people can buy a new car for not much more than a used one, and it's more efficient and comfortable, they just might.

Wow, you have a lot of trouble with basic reading comprehension!

Before you reply to another one of my posts, find an adult to help you understand it.

My insurance keeps going up because private insurance in America has a monopoly on access to healthcare so they can charge whatever they want until the public gets so fed up they demand a single pair of healthcare system.

If things continue the way they're going with voter suppression and right wing extremists buying up the voting machine companies I don't think it'll matter anymore and then that will be the end of that. About 10% of the country will be allowed to have health care and odds are you won't be in it.

And the answer is 0.13%.

What? We're you expecting a different answer?

AI is designed to take shortcuts in order to improve performance. It's already been caught more than once for example appearing to find problems on an X-ray with a very high rate of success when in actuality it had just picked up on a simple pattern where for example something is dumb as a ruler was included on the X-rays that had the problems and wasn't included on an X-ray that didn't...

Not that any of us have any say in this whatsoever. AI bullshit is going to dominate everything whether we like it or not. Just like how the price of ram has increased by 5 to 10 times and we all just have to suck it down.

We have a very small window left to the side of we are going to live in a society where around 2,000 people get to decide how we live. And we need to decide if having the girl that hands us our coffee say Merry Christmas is worth giving up everything else to those 2,000 people.

Not being constitutional has never stopped Trump in the past why should it stop us?

I mean at this point Trump has wiped his ass with the Constitution so many times it's going to take a full rewrites to get the shit stains out.

Assuming We don't have a third term of Trump. He might be too senile. Multiple doctors have mentioned that it's likely the bumps and bruises on his hands are from an IV drip for an Alzheimer's medication. And if he's that far along he's not going to make it to 2028.

He's trying to solve the affordability crisis he created.

To deal with the affordability crisis. It doesn't work because if you get hit in one of those by an American SUV you might as well have gotten hit on a motorcycle. Hell you might be better off getting hit on a motorcycle is a small chance you wouldn' Get thrown clear instead of grinded into paste

The other problem is they aren't fast enough for freeways. Even the ones that can hit freeway speeds can't accelerate quickly enough to safely merge.

And of course there are much lower profit so nobody is going to want to make them. If a competitor company started to make them then it would get bought out and shut down similar to how Microsoft buys out and shuts down anyone that threatens their windows or office Monopoly...

It's a completely unworkable solution to a problem Trump created himself.

Joe Biden was on track to do the kind of trust busting we needed to do in order to start getting prices down. He had already gotten inflation to around 2%. But Trump wanted 2 trillion and billionaire tax cuts and to get that he needed to raise taxes on you. So he did tariffs. Basically a national sales tax so he could pick your pocket and put the money in his pocket and the pockets of his billionaire buddies who bankrolled his campaign. Meanwhile he's gotten millions of dollars from the trusts Biden was going to bust. So you can imagine what happened to those investigations...

Affordability is a political problem and we aren't going to solve it by electing convicted felons with multiple credible rape accusations.

Are the same people who want put these back doors in your devices so they can monitor "criminals".

I'm not saying we ease off to Chinese, we got to keep that cold war going somehow or people are going to start trying to cut the fence budgets and redirect them to education and we can't have that now can we?

But maybe ask if you're the dog the tail is wagging.

I mean it's for streaming and you can live without that but you can expect prices to go up now. They will pay for this buyout by jacking up prices.

Sure you can sail the seven seas for Netflix but you can't do that for food. I mean you can but eventually you will probably get caught and thrown in prison...

Fun fact Joe Biden was in the process of breaking up several of the trusts that were artificially raising food prices. Like the egg producers that were colluding and the beef slaughterhouses of which there are only four viable ones left...

You can imagine what happened to that work after Biden lost the election. Meanwhile Donald Trump got 5 million from one of the beef slaughterhouse companies.

Oh and don't expect other big corporations to save you. They just Sue the Monopoly trusts every few years and get a chunk of money from them to make up the difference. They do not pass those costs savings on to you.

But hey, If you go to Starbucks the girl who hands you your coffee might say Merry Christmas. Seems like a fair trade for a 20% increase in your grocery bills every couple of years...

It really works too. Robocop feels heavy and tank like

4k is a bit of a stretch for software decoding.