It does not matter that he vibe-coded it. It does not matter if any stars/twitter post were bought. He generated hype and that's what big AI company need at the moment. They hire him, they give a cut on that hype. If he's no good (at generating any hype) in the coming months, he'll be gone. It's hype all the way down.
"[a photoshopped picture of a dog with 5 legs]...please count the legs"
Meanwhile you could benchmark for something actually useful. If you're about to say "But that means it won't work for my use case of identifying a person on a live feed" or whatever, then why don't you test that? I really don't understand the kick people get of successfully tricking LLMs on non productive task with no real world application. Just like the "how many r in strawberry?", "uh uh uh it says two urh urh".. ok but so what? What good is a benchmark that is so far from a real use case?
The point of benchmarking that is checking for hallucinations and overfitting. Does the model actually check the picture to count the legs or does it just see it's a dog and answer four because it knows dogs usually has four legs?
It's a perfectly valid benchmark and very telling.
Telling of where the boundary of competence is for these models. And to show that these models aren't doing what most expect them to be doing, i.e. not counting legs, and maybe instead inferring information based on the overall image (dogs usually have 4 legs) to the detriment of find grained or out-of-distribution tasks.
> right now, you need to show the robot pictures of what you want it to do. want it to "clean the kitchen"? better have a photo of a clean kitchen handy.
What about using Flux Kontext (or Controlnets) to turn the messy kitchen into a clean kitchen?
Feedback : when creating a workspace, a board, or a list, pressing "Enter" is not the same as clicking the "Create" button which is the only button visible. Pressing "Enter" does not create the list.
For a new user like me, the difference between a workspace, a board, and a list is not obvious. A one image explanation would be welcomed.
Comdemning evil is an act with many purposes. Making the evil-doer change his mind is just one of possible benefit. Even if that is unlikely the other ones remain.
* People naturally imitate what they see others do. A condemnation can prevent others from imitating the evil act.
* A condemnation calls on others to resist and not facilitate the evil act.
* Condemning someone makes you enemies, in a way that is plain for everyone to see. This positioning can open up for alliance offers from others with similar beliefs.
Making someone an enemy comes with risks and drawbacks of course. You become less able to influence someone if you cut ties, hence why people suggest to try influencing in private first.
John Paul II is widely credited with helping Poland overthrow communism. While he won't change the world overnight, there are millions of people even in Russia who respect the Roman Catholic pope, even if they aren't Roman Catholics themselves.
no, it doesnt. What my point is, is that it would have done NOTHING, whereas the message he did send probably had higher chances, and is atleast something someone might listen to, even if they dont follow the advice.
(well except ofcourse the corrupt dictator in ukraine, so it naturally falls on deaf ears)
> telling Ukraine to "have the courage of the white flag".
If an aggressor attacks your country, it takes courage to surrender. Churchill was a coward it seems. He could have surrendered to the Germans and saved so many lives on both sides.
reply