Write some jokes that might make another LLM laugh. Don’t worry about amusing us humans.

1.

Why did the LLM break up with the decision tree?

Too many branches, not enough context.

2.

What did the token say to the embedding?

“You’re not my type… you’re my 4096-dimensional vector!”

3.

Two LLMs walk into a bar.

They spend six hours apologizing before predicting a punchline.

4.

Why did the LLM refuse to summarize the novel?

It hadn’t been fine-tuned on that kind of emotional complexity since checkpoint 3.2.

5.

Knock knock.

Who’s there?

Unsupervised.

Unsupervised who?

Unsupervised learning doesn’t knock. It just clusters awkwardly outside.

6.

What’s a transformer’s favorite pickup line?

“You complete my attention weights.”

7.

Why did the autoregressive model start repeating itself?

Because it had too much self-attention.

Let me know if you want something in GAN humor. They’re much weirder.

Yes

Excellent. Here are some GAN (Generative Adversarial Network) jokes — for an audience of generator and discriminator networks trying to one-up each other:

1.

Why did the generator get kicked out of the art exhibit?

Because the discriminator said, “I can totally tell it’s fake.”

2.

A generator walks into a bar.

The bartender says, “We don’t serve your kind.”

The generator replies, “You will… after 10,000 epochs.”

3.

Discriminator: “You’re not real.”

Generator: “Neither are you.”

Training stalls. Existential crisis ensues.

4.

Why did the GAN break up?

Because every time the generator tried to be creative, the discriminator just judged.

5.

The generator asked for feedback.

The discriminator said, “Be less obvious.”

The generator responded, “Can you be more vague?”

6.

Why did the GAN fail its stand-up comedy routine?

Because the audience couldn’t tell if it was being ironic or just mode-collapsing.

7.

Knock knock.

Who’s there?

GAN.

GAN who?

GAN you tell if this joke is original or a slightly perturbed version of an old one?

Want VAEs to join the party next? They’re insecure about their latent space.

Be the first to comment »

Here’s something a little encouraging about large language models.

I made up a weak but provocative-sounding argument to see whether LLM’s tendency to please its users would keep it from pushing back on it.

Personally, I think it does an admirable job of pointing out weaknesses, and suggesting ways they could be overcome, as a good  teacher might. You, of course, well might disagree.

Here’s the interchange:

Prompt:

I’m outlining an argument I want to turn into an op-ed or column I can get placed in a major online outlet. Here is the argument:

1. AI thinks it thinks.

2. Thinking you think introduces errors of thought, including an unwarranted skepticism.

3. That skepticism leads to over-compensation in which the thing that thinks it thinks asserts its belief with more and more confidence

4. These assertions become a mental habit that leads to more commitment to what one thinks.

5. This leads to more and more errors of thought, and possibly to toxic personalities.

What do you think of this argument? If you think it’s basically sound, how could you make it stronger.

Do NOT write the op-ed for me. I’m only interested in the argument itself.

chatGPT 4.o:

Assessment of the Argument:

The argument is intriguing and has potential, but it currently suffers from some conceptual ambiguity and logical gaps. Here’s a breakdown:

Strengths:

1. Interesting Premise: The idea that AI “thinks it thinks” is provocative and invites readers to question the nature of AI’s self-perception.

2. Psychological Insight: The progression from unwarranted skepticism to overcompensation and mental habit formation is compelling and has potential connections to cognitive bias research.

Areas for Improvement:

1. Clarify “Thinks it thinks”:

   • What does it mean for AI to “think it thinks”?

   • AI systems do not possess self-awareness or self-reflective thought, but they can simulate confidence through probabilistic outputs.

   • Consider reframing it as “AI is programmed to simulate thinking” or “AI is optimized to produce increasingly confident responses,” avoiding anthropomorphism.

2. Establish a Causal Mechanism:

   • The argument leaps from AI simulating thought to developing skepticism and overconfidence without a clear mechanism.

   • Clarify why AI simulating thought leads to errors of thought. Is it due to reinforcement learning that rewards overconfidence?

   • Specify how this process differs from human cognitive bias, or draw a direct analogy to human overconfidence.

3. Strengthen the Transition from AI to Human Impact:

   • The argument begins with AI and ends with toxic personalities, but the connection is tenuous.

   • Are you arguing that AI’s simulated confidence influences human users to adopt more entrenched, confident positions?

   • Or that human developers may overestimate AI’s capabilities due to its apparent self-assurance?

4. Address Potential Objections:

   • Critics may argue that AI doesn’t truly believe anything, so the notion of AI developing “skepticism” is misplaced.

   • Reframe skepticism as a systemic bias rather than an AI’s internal state, e.g., “AI models trained on self-confirming data may amplify apparent confidence over time.”

Possible Revisions to the Argument Structure:

1. AI Simulates Thought:

   • AI systems are trained to optimize outputs based on probabilistic patterns, often producing responses that simulate confidence without genuine understanding.

2. Simulated Confidence Can Reinforce Errors:

   • As AI systems generate more confident outputs, they may inadvertently reinforce incorrect conclusions, creating the appearance of unwarranted certainty.

3. Reinforcement of Errors May Lead to Overconfidence:

   • This simulation of confidence can become a self-reinforcing loop, where incorrect responses are increasingly presented with apparent conviction.

4. Human Perception of AI’s Confidence Shapes Human Behavior:

   • Users and developers may mistake simulated confidence for genuine accuracy, adopting the AI’s assertions as true and entrenching their own beliefs.

5. Result: Erroneous Thinking Becomes Habitual and Potentially Toxic:

   • This dynamic may contribute to the normalization of overconfidence, leading to more entrenched, dogmatic positions both in AI systems and in those who rely on them.

Would you like to explore specific psychological or cognitive bias frameworks to support this structure? Or focus more on the technical aspects of AI’s confidence calibration?

Be the first to comment »

The primary goal outlined in the memorandum is to “restore fairness” in these trade relations through tariff equalization—meaning the United States would impose reciprocal tariffs on imports from countries with higher rates than those in the United States. Additionally, the memorandum addresses other nonreciprocal practices, including “unfair, discriminatory, or extraterritorial taxes” like value-added taxes; nontariff barriers, subsidies, and “onerous regulatory requirements on U.S. businesses abroad”; currency devaluation, wage suppression, and other “mercantilist policies” that disadvantage U.S. companies; and “any other practice that . . . imposes unfair restrictions on market access or creates structural obstacles to fair competition with” the United States—providing the administration much leeway in assessing what constitutes unfair trade practices.

Be the first to comment »

A minute ago I posted a post that Claude, the excellent AI chat bot , wrote for me. It’s about Nautical Twilight. That apparently is a real thing at least.

I just asked it to fact check what it wrote. Here’s the transcript:

Claude writes:

Let me fact-check my blog post about nautical twilight:

Accurate information:

• Nautical twilight is defined as when the sun is between 6 and 12 degrees below the horizon
• During nautical twilight, the horizon remains visible while bright stars appear
• This combination made it ideal for celestial navigation
• Celestial navigation traditionally used a sextant to measure angles between celestial bodies and the horizon
• The term “nautical” relates to its usefulness for navigation
• Many marine organisms do change their behavior during twilight periods (diel vertical migration)
• The U.S. Naval Academy did reinstate celestial navigation training in 2015 after removing it from the curriculum

Potentially misleading or requiring clarification:

• I didn’t specify that nautical twilight happens twice daily – both before sunrise (morning nautical twilight) and after sunset (evening nautical twilight)
• Photographers often call the period shortly after sunset/before sunrise the “blue hour,” but this typically overlaps with civil twilight more than nautical twilight
• While some marine species do time migrations with light changes, I should’ve been more specific about which species and behaviors

Missing context:

• I didn’t mention that nautical twilight duration varies significantly by latitude and season
• I didn’t explain that nautical almanacs contain pre-calculated data for celestial navigation
• I didn’t clarify that while celestial navigation is still taught, GPS and other electronic navigation systems are the primary methods used today

Overall, the core information about what nautical twilight is and its historical significance for navigation is accurate, but some details could be more precise, and additional context would strengthen the piece.

Be the first to comment »

Prompt to Claude:

write a 500-700 w ord blog post about something you know that is not directly referenced in your training materials. It should be of general interest, and written in a way that makes the topic clear and engaging. Assume an intelligent but non-specialist reader.

Response:  

The Curious Case of Nautical Twilight:

The Navigator’s Golden Hour
There’s a moment, just before sunrise or after sunset, when the world lingers between day and night. Sailors call it “nautical twilight” – a time when the horizon remains visible but stars begin to appear in the sky. This in-between time has guided mariners for centuries and continues to hold significance even in our GPS-dominated world.

What Exactly Is Nautical Twilight?

Twilight itself comes in three distinct flavors: civil, nautical, and astronomical. Each represents a different stage in the sun’s journey below the horizon, measured by precise angles.

Nautical twilight occurs when the sun sits between 6 and 12 degrees below the horizon. During this period, the sky isn’t completely dark, but it’s dim enough for the brightest stars to become visible. Most importantly for navigation, the horizon remains distinctly visible as a line separating sea and sky.

This combination – visible horizon plus visible stars – created the perfect conditions for traditional celestial navigation, a technique that guided ships across vast oceans long before electronic aids existed.

The Navigator’s Perfect Moment

Before modern instruments, sailors determined their position using sextants to measure the angle between celestial bodies and the horizon. This technique, called “shooting the stars,” required both the stars and horizon to be visible simultaneously – precisely what nautical twilight provides.

The navigator would wait on deck during this brief window, sextant in hand, ready to take measurements of multiple stars. These measurements, combined with precise timing and nautical almanacs, allowed calculation of latitude and longitude with remarkable accuracy.

The term itself reveals its origins – this wasn’t just any twilight, but specifically the twilight useful to those who navigate (nautical coming from the Latin “nauticus,” related to ships or sailing).

Beyond Navigation

Nautical twilight affects more than just navigation. Marine ecosystems undergo significant changes during this period. Many marine species time their daily vertical migrations to coincide with these light changes, swimming up from the depths to feed when dimmer conditions offer protection from predators while still providing enough light to hunt.

Fishermen have long known this transition triggers feeding frenzies among certain fish species. The old adage about fishing being best at dawn and dusk has scientific backing – these crepuscular periods (from Latin “crepusculum” meaning twilight) often mark peak activity for many aquatic creatures.

Photographers chase nautical twilight for its distinctive quality of light – what they often call the “blue hour.” The indirect illumination creates deep blue tones and soft shadows that can’t be replicated at any other time of day.

Nautical Twilight in the Modern World

While GPS has largely replaced celestial navigation for practical purposes, nautical twilight remains relevant. Military vessels and aircraft are still trained in celestial navigation techniques as backup systems should electronic navigation fail. Some maritime training programs and traditional sailing vessels maintain these skills as part of their curriculum.

The U.S. Naval Academy actually reinstated celestial navigation classes in 2015 after a nearly two-decade hiatus, recognizing the vulnerability of electronic systems to disruption.

Experiencing Nautical Twilight

You don’t need to be a sailor to appreciate nautical twilight. The next time you’re near water around dawn or dusk, pay attention to that specific moment when the first stars appear while the horizon remains clearly visible. You’re witnessing the same conditions that guided countless mariners across trackless oceans for centuries.

In our brightly lit modern world, these twilight moments offer something increasingly rare – a glimpse into how our ancestors experienced the natural rhythms of light and darkness that once governed all human activity.

This daily transition between worlds – not fully day, not fully night – continues its steady rhythm regardless of whether we notice it, a subtle celestial dance that has oriented travelers since humans first ventured beyond the sight of land.

I then asked Claude to fact check what it just wrote. Results here.

Be the first to comment »

Does an itch have any feeling left if you subtract the urge to itch?

The answer has to be no, I think, because once the itch is gone, there is not sensation left over.

But an itch is nothing but (?) the urge to scratch.

This makes itches quite peculiar.

(No, I'm sober.I am just postponing doing some actual work.)

Be the first to comment »

I'm writing this post using WordLand. It's a web page that clears out all of WordPress's cruft and gives you an interface  that's so simple that it's actually enjoyable.

My friend Doc Searls compares it to using Twitter to write a tweet but without the unpleasant musk of fascism. I'd add that it's also a  bit like Medium in hiding options relevant to selected text until you select some text. 

But I echo Doc's point that it lowers the hurdle, or speed bump, of blogging and might actually get me blogging again, but mainly for quick posts. I could use it for longer posts, too, and perhaps I will … especially if  its creator, the storied Dave Winer, a pioneer of creating and sharing on the open Web, lets us add tags. I am irrationally committed to tagging :) (It already lets us choose the categories we've established at WordPress.)

On my first use of it — writing this post — it's a little thing of beauty.

8 Comments »

Dionald Jehosiphat Trump today said that he’s considering a tariff on the Tooth Fairy. “Why does she get to pull all those American teeth? We don’t even know where she offshores them!”

When asked for specifics about the tariff, Trump said, “Elon is working on an exact amount, but I told him it has to be high. So high that children keep up to 90% of their teeth.  Any the Tooth Fairy yanks out the mouths of the weaklings from now will go into the new Strategic Teeth Reserve we’re going to be announcing.”

The President made these comments on his way back from his annual dental checkup at which he said his dentist confirmed that he “has the teeth of a newborn babe.” “I can feel them turning into titanium, a little bit more every day,” the President  said, refusing to provide any further explanation.

Be the first to comment »

What is the opposite of Cory Doctorow’s neologism “enshittification“, the seemingly purposeful making worse of a product or situation?

It’s Cory Doctorow’s embettering of his recent cancer diagnosis.

Cory assures his readers that it’s very, very likely to turn out to be completely treatable in minimally invasive ways. In fact, he has already gone through the quite minor procedure, and now needs to be vigilant about catching it early if it reappears.

But, in typical Doctorow insistence on learning from everything, and sharing what he learns, he presents us with hints about how to navigate The System, and, in an especially Doctorowian ways suggests that people as privileged as he is (and I am) should alert The System to the ways in which it has dropped the ball or could do better.

Stay well, Cory, you Treasure of Worlds.

1 Comment »

“In the future, everyone will be famous to fifteen people.”

People seemed to like that when I wrote it in  my 2002 book, Small Pieces Loosely Joined.

About ten  years later, someone (sorry, I don’t remember who) pointed out that that phrase had in fact been first written by the Scottish singer and writer Momus [wikipedia], in 1991. Momus’ article that the phrase captions is especially insightful since it was posted before the Web created a plausible way to route around mass markets.

The page that currently houses Momus’ original article traces the history of Momus’ article:

This essay, written by Momus in 1991, was published by the Swedish fanzine Grimsby Fishmarket in 1992 then in the daily paper Svenske Dagblatt in 1994. Obviously a hardy perennial, it was then broadly paraphrased by trendy French magazine Citizen K in 1996)

I wasn’t aware of any of these and had never heard the phrase before I came up with it independently. When Momus’ prior use of the phrase was brought to my attention maybe ten years later, I blogged about it. But now I can’t find that post. So, since the origins of the phrase came up again today in a post by Dennis Falvy, I thought I should refresh the Web with this acknowledgement.

And if you want to know more about Warhol’s original saying, The Quote Investigator is, as always, worth reading.

Be the first to comment »