this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2026
18 points (95.0% liked)

TechTakes

2611 readers
75 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid - welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful you’ll near-instantly regret.

Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.

If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post — there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high.

The post Xitter web has spawned so many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)

Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.

(Credit and/or blame to David Gerard for starting this, and happy 4th July in advance.)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] samvines@awful.systems 4 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

I studied transformer architecture models and have played around with them (unfortunately) enough to understand how they work. Under the surface the model produces what look like XML tags <thinking> </thinking> to designate which tokens are thinking tokens and which are "normal" output. That is literally the only hard difference between the two output modes. The reinforcement learning might tune the thinking to be more like "what a human would expect to see in a thinking block" but it's still the same RNG madlib process generating everything underneath and any attempt to ascribe intelligence to this process should be met with ~~lethal force~~ incredulous cynicism. Just like any claim that "we don't know how they work" - actually yes we know exactly how they work. What we can't comprehend is the exact numbers and weights inside the massive pile of probabilistic algebra being processed to generate your slop. If I flip 5 coins in a row and the observer's belief is anything other than "you just got very lucky" most people would call them crazy rather than join the cult and worship the coin god...

[–] BioMan@awful.systems 1 points 1 hour ago

God I remember having to explain to dozens of people that 'reasoning' models just exude a lot of text 'talking to themselves' and then summarize it. They were all just "It CANT be that silly" and many outright would not believe me, because that was not 'reasoning'