Homunculiheaded

Agreed! While these results are very promising, there's still a lot to explore in this space.

In addition to the "prompt consistency" and "thought-control" ideas mentioned in the post, I'm definitely curious how the performance is on more complex structured data (things like codegen).

It's too bad that reality doesn't really care if you have clever accounting tricks to show that "things aren't really as bad as they look!"

The only number that matters at all is global green house gas emissions. We need to get that to zero, and it has continued to go up.

Imagine you have a drinking problem and your doctor tells you you need to stop drinking alcohol or you will suffer liver failure. You can argue all day about what percentage of your drinks are alcoholic. "Doctor, I drink 3 cans of coke and only 12 G&Ts now, not 1 can of coke and 24 beers like I used to, I went from 4% of my drinks being non-alcoholic to 20%!" If your daily total alcohol consumed keep rising you have a problem.

That's the situation we're in with co2 emissions. There are many clever ways to make it look like everything is fine, but reality doesn't care. If our global CO2 emissions continue to rise we have absolutely no hope.

What if the police asked for the names of everyone who discussed using cannabis in their email exchanges? Would you really argue that in states where cannabis use was illegal that it would be perfectly okay to do this, collect just the names of people who had used mentioned cannabis in email and then visit their homes to question them further about this?

I'm pretty surprised how many people on HN seem to find this acceptable when this is clearly a form of dragnet surveillance.