> Main problem: the quality dramatically hits the shitter done once it falls back to "pdf2latext" due to complex tables.

Could try screenshotting the PDF and passing that to gemini

This is what I'm doing by now. Uploading the entire .pdf dynamically then giving it a pipe to ask questions.

> For example, you can say "why is it not committed yet?" and it will give you an explanation and say it's actually ready to be committed.

That's exactly what i want to happen. I hate when it assumes my direct question was an indirect instruction

This is one of those things that won't ever be "solved" as people just want different things here, hence we can steer the models with the system prompt.

I'm mostly the same as you, I don't want the model to assume things, or act on implicit "directions". But then also, sometimes I do, and I myself might not always know when what approach is best.

Indeed some people think they want a machine guessing at your intentions and acting upon that guess. Those people Are wrong in at least 2 directions: that it is what they want, and their implicit assumption that it could possibly be safe.

Indeed, I don’t ask rhetorical questions to an AI. They are of doubtful use when talking verball ly to a human, less good in online discussions, and totally unnecessary for agents.

That doesn't really solve the problem. We can't conclusively say the models don't have qualia. Hell we don't know if a perfectly accurate atom-for-atom simulation of a human brain, would produce qualia.

You don't need everything internal, but having some idea of recent events is useful. If you ask it to implement some local AI there's a decent chance it will try to use qwen 2.5 without wondering if anything better came out since

Speculative decoding is lossless because the main model checks whether it agrees with what the drafter outputted

TFA says as much, and METR said so themselves

The parent comment didn't mention anything about ISA rates and SIPPs in terms of performance, they said that it was easy. You might disagree with their priorities but that doesn't change whether it's the right decision given those priorities

My understanding is that that's what makes it a disorder - that it's just a collection of symptoms that seem to appear together, rather than something with a known mechanism and cause

Oh interesting, I didn’t know that was the distinction - thanks!

you’re thinking of “syndrome”

Ah! You're right, thanks for the correction. Cunningham's Law wins again.

Goomba fallacy

Oh I didn’t know that one, it’s pretty good! https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Goomba_fallacy

Not really. I’m not contrasting two peoples opinions on the same thing, but rather aggregate vibe on two different but functionally similar things.

Bit like if hn was convinced white cats catch mice better than black ones. Point out that this makes no sense wouldn’t be a fallacy, even if it involves aggregating opinions from people with their own views on cats

I think you're using different definitions of best. If best = leads to a correct answer overall then by definition anything that leads to a bad outcome can't be best