liz retweeted
It's a tragedy that the communist U.S. government has made it illegal to speculate on onions
liz retweeted
i would blindly trust literally any @soft_fox_lad product recommendation btw.
liz retweeted
- a vacuum cleaner repair guy convinced reddit that dyson was bad and reddit hasn't been the same since
- a finance guy has created an entire pseudoscience about laundry that I tried to address reddit.com/r/laundry/comment…
- an NYT investigator's sources confirmed my post was right
liz retweeted
ELIZABETH HOLMES: of course it worked. the lights turned on. it was on the cloud
NATHAN FIELDER: ok. but you know what feelings are, right? like you have them?
WEIRD COCAINE HUSBAND: [watching youtube at 2x speed] babe it says here the mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell
liz retweeted
It's really amazing, when you think about it, how many objects around you are made from petroleum.
i feel like a lot of ai takes are somewhat downstream from people getting super blackpilled about nobody caring or thinking about this for years. i find thid state of affairs very unlikely to continue and expect humanity to have a messy but relatively reasonable reaction.
liz retweeted
I finally understand: video games are not actually fun
All of them seem to require either some stupid amount of mental effort (e.g. pay close attention to something boring for a long period), or some time-wasting trivial tasks like grinding, or both
liz retweeted
Claude figured out the origin of the NIST curve parameters. Turns out to have been timestamps!
anthropic.com/research/ecdsa…
liz retweeted
"wow the new nick cammarata post is such a revolutionary new technique"
"do you have any idea whether it actually works"
"no"
"me neither"
interpretability might be the most important scientific problem in the world right now, as I don't think we can solve alignment if we don't know what we're building. I think I have good news about it. I co-authored early work in mechanistic interpretability at OpenAI and came away pessimistic, because neural networks appeared to fold into arbitrary tangled knots. years later, I started openai's first large-scale automated interpretability project, finding about 2% of neurons legible with the primitive tools we had
with modern agentic tools and a much closer look, the picture looks totally different. the vast majority in models up to trillions of parameters are legible, and their circuits beautiful. many famous examples of tangled neurons turned out to be misunderstood. The roadblocks I expected mostly aren't there. I now think ambitious interpretability will be solved by the time we need it most, and possibly quite soon, as automated scientists keep improving. it may be a bitter lesson for interpretability: the simple thing, at absurd scale, works
already-clean.goodfire.com/

















