vitaelabitur

thanks a lot, much appreciated

Yeah, pretty accurate description of how depression looks.

I'm reminded of Lars von Trier's Melancholia. I don't recommend it to anyone but it's the best, most visceral portrayal of the condition I have found in any medium. Watching it was strangely cathartic.

Shameless plug for my structured LLM outputs handbook which is written in a similar spirit: https://nanonets.com/cookbooks/structured-llm-outputs/

Thanks for sharing, appreciate it.

Would you say it is convenient to use it for writing, say, 500 words at a go?

> And really, really boring and slow a lot of the time

If you only watch the story-driven scenes in Lawrence of Arabia, and skip the prolonged shots of the desert, you would miss out feeling the same vastness and heat Lawrence is feeling.

There is a limit to how much a film can make you think or feel. Films that reach the highest limits need "boring" voids in-between the primary scenes. These voids are not to ingest more, but to help digest what has been ingested in previous scenes, with subliminal scenes and silence that let the right thoughts and feelings grow.

The word you are looking for, if you are looking for one, is declinism.

We traded books for films, and now films for short videos, always moving towards what is easier to enjoy.

Quite a while ago, books became a taste that needs to be patiently acquired. Someone starting to read today is more likely to develop the taste by gradually easing into books that demand more and more. Say maybe Huxley -> Camus -> Wilde -> Dostoevsky.

Now that short clips are here, the same has happened to films. The uninitiated need to sit through Scorsese, Hitchcock, Wilder, Kubrick, Altman before attempting Fellini, Antonioni, Tarkovsky, Ozu, Resnais.

And by the way, someone who is naturally inclined to love films (or books) won't be affected, even today. Am I wrong? The way they are described here, I would crush these film students.

This is my all-time favorite mathematics book. You learn calculus through a series of fictional conversations between a teacher and a student.

It is easy to read, yet I remember it gave me an odd visceral sense of what calculus is (or maybe I just thought it did).

I am reading it again.

You are absolutely right — Let me know if you want to read my personal anecdote on "Dead Internet Theory"...

Yeah, I especially hate how paranoid everyone is (but rightly so). I am constantly suspicious of others' perfectly original work being AI, and others are constantly suspicious of my work being AI.

There's no advantage wrt output quality, but it can be more economical in some high-error regimes, with less LLM calls used in resampling (max 2 for most errors).

We used Docusaurus.

One of the authors here. I've read the paper. Brilliant work, especially the slicing implementation for denser token masks.

> Increasing context length by complaining about schema errors is almost always worse from an end quality perspective than just retrying till the schema passes.

Another way to do this is to use a hybrid approach. You perform unconstrained generation first, and then constrained generation on the failures.