Yes that puzzled me too, I checked like 5 different transcripts and they all said the same thing.

The swallow may fly south with the sun, or the house-martin or the plumber may seek warmer climes in winter; yet these are not strangers to our land.

There’s billions of people, literally billions of them

On lemmy?

I don’t know how we’ve managed to get to 2025 and there’s still apparently people who haven’t seen a thousand shit PEMDAS posts already

Fallout was fucking awesome. If you’re into Fallout that is, which I am.

UP AND AT THEM

Hopping on this to share that Milo Learns made by some of my Cambodian friends also just added Japanese for conversation practice. It has an online community as well if you don’t like talking to an AI. But sadly it is freemium, so OP wins on that front. https://milo.niy.ai/

You don’t even need to, you just need seven digits of numbers. As password formats go, it’s hella low entropy.

First, there’s no “somehow magically” about it, the entire logic of the halting problem’s proof relies on being able to set up a contradiction. I’ll agree that returning undecidable doesn’t solve the problem as stated because the problem as stated only allows two responses.

My wider point is that the Halting problem as stated is a purely academic one that’s unlikely to ever cause a problem in any real world scenario. Indeed, the ability to say “I don’t know” to unsolvable questions is a hot topic of ongoing LLM research.

It’s easy to be dismissive because you’re talking from the frame of reference of current LLMs. The article is positing a universal truth about all possible technological advances in future LLMs.

Mathematically you might be able to prove I don’t always (and I’m not convinced of that even; I don’t think there is an inherent contradiction like the one used for the proof of Halting), but the bar for acceptable false positives is sufficiently low and the scenario is such an edge case of an edge case of an edge case, that anyone trying to use the whole principle to argue anything about real-world applications is grasping at straws.

The thing that always bothered me about the Halting Problem is that the proof of it is so thoroughly convoluted and easy to fix (simply add the ability to return “undecidable”) that it seems wanky to try applying it as part of a proof for any kind of real world problem.

(Edit: jfc, fuck me for trying to introduce any kind of technical discussion in a pile-on thread. I wasn’t even trying to cheerlead for LLMs, I just wanted to talk about comp sci)

They always remind me of this guy on account of the unfortunate subtext

Yeah I’m with you, because I don’t understand why a “dumbass” would be the speed of light.

Makes more sense for God to measure things in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_units

Some people find the smell very strong. Something to do with receptors idk? I know someone with a banana allergy who can immediately tell if he’s entered a room with bananas in it from smell alone, even if they’re not peeled.

also, banana strings

The duality of man -

Wholesome: dad gets involved with his kid’s hobby and helps him win

Not wholesome: kid shows up to play with a rigged beyblade someone else made for him, in order to participate in a one-sided competition, predictably breaking the other kid’s toy

I dunno, I feel like neither empty space nor vast aeons of darkness are particularly pulling their weight in terms of really doing existing with any real level of conviction. It’s easy to be vast if you’re doing fuck all with most of it.

that was a good joke, but I don’t think 16 out of 20 people got it (at the time of me writing this).

Unless you meant it of course, in which case joke’s on me.