SneerClub

983 readers

26 users here now

Hurling ordure at the TREACLES, especially those closely related to LessWrong.

AI-Industrial-Complex grift is fine as long as it sufficiently relates to the AI doom from the TREACLES. (Though TechTakes may be more suitable.)

This is sneer club, not debate club. Unless it's amusing debate.

[Especially don't debate the race scientists, if any sneak in - we ban and delete them as unsuitable for the server.]

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Building an early warning system for LLM-aided biological threat creation (openai.com)

submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

56 comments fedilink hide all child comments

OpenAI blog post: https://openai.com/research/building-an-early-warning-system-for-llm-aided-biological-threat-creation

Orange discuss: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39207291

I don't have any particular section to call out. May post thoughts ~~tomorrow~~ today it's after midnight oh gosh, but wanted to post since I knew ya'll'd be interested in this.

Terrorists could use autocorrect according to OpenAI! Discuss!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (7 children)

In computability theory, super-recursive algorithms are a generalization of ordinary algorithms that are more powerful, that is, compute more than Turing machines[citation needed]

This is literally the first sentence of the article, and it has a citation needed.

You can tell it's crankery solely based on the fact that the "definition" section contains zero math. Compare it to the definition section of an actual Turing machine.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (6 children)

More from the "super-recursive algorithm" page:

Traditional Turing machines with a write-only output tape cannot edit their previous outputs; generalized Turing machines, according to Jürgen Schmidhuber, can edit their output tape as well as their work tape.

... the Hell?

I'm not sure what that page is trying to say, but it sounds like someone got Turing machines confused with pushdown automata.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That's plainly false btw. The model of a Turing machine with a write-only output tape is fully equivalent to the one where you have a read-write output tape. You prove that as a student in elementary computation theory.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

The article is very poorly written, but here's an explanation of what they're saying. An "inductive Turing machine" is a Turing machine which is allowed to run forever, but for each cell of the output tape there eventually comes a time after which it never modifies that cell again. We consider the machine's output to be the sequence of eventual limiting values of the cells. Such a machine is strictly more powerful than Turing machines in that it can compute more functions than just recursive ones. In fact it's an easy exercise to show that a function is computable by such a machine iff it is "limit computable", meaning it is the pointwise limit of a sequence of recursive functions. Limit computable functions have been well studied in mainstream computer science, whereas "inductive Turing machines" seem to mostly be used by people who want to have weird pointless arguments about the Church-Turing thesis.

load more comments (4 replies)