Category: genetics

submitted by /u/PrincipleLevel4529 [link] [comments]

Grok, you are amazing and have made my life better. Thank you Seriously, I sat on Grok for about a half hour, perfected a perfect plan for a first date with a girl I’ve been talking to on Facebook for a while. Me and Grok decided on bringing her roses with cute little note attached inviting her to Texas Roadhouse and she was amazingly receptive as well as flattered. We connected so well on a deep level and I’m feeling so stoked to meet her again which we agreed on as I was paying the bill. I don’t know what date to go on next but I definitely don’t want it to be the typical date. Thank you Grok & the xAI team, you have improved my social anxiety & and given me reassurance to work up the courage to do something that (for me) is super hard! And I am eternally grateful for that. submitted by /u/Zmeiler [link] [comments]

AI is used in almost every field nowadays — education, business, personal assistant, etc. If this advancement of AI had existed back in 2020. Everyone was just chilling during quarantine, so do you think you would’ve taken a different path? Chosen a different career? just curious submitted by /u/QubitGates [link] [comments]

Many users are hailing OpenAI's o3 as a major step forward toward AGI. We will soon know whether it surpasses Gemini 2.5 Pro on the Chatbot Arena benchmark. But rather than taking the word of the users that determine that ranking, it would be super helpful for us to be able to assess that intelligence for ourselves. Perhaps the most basic means we have as of assessing another person's intelligence is to hear them talk. Some of us may conflate depth or breadth of knowledge with intelligence when listening to another. But I think most of us can well enough judge how intelligent a person is by simply listening to what they say about a certain topic. What would we discover if we applied this simple method of intelligence evaluation to top AI models? Imagine a matchup between o3 and 2.5 Pro, each of whom are given 3 minutes to talk about a certain topic or answer a certain question. Imagine these matchups covering various different topics like AI development, politics, economics, philosophy, science and education. That way we could listen to those matchups where they talk about something we are already knowledgeable about, and could more easily judge Such matchups would make great YouTube videos and podcasts. They would be especially useful because most of us are simply not familiar with the various benchmarks that are used today to determine which AI is the most powerful in various areas. These matchups would probably also be very entertaining. Imagine these top two AIs talking about important topics that affect all of us today, like the impact Trump's tariffs are having on the world, the recent steep decline in financial markets, or what we can expect from the 2025 agentic AI revolution. Perhaps the two models can be instructed to act like a politician delivering a speech designed to sway public opinion on a matter where there are two opposing approaches that are being considered. The idea behind this is also that AIs that are closer to AGI would probably be more adept at the organizational, rhetorical, emotional and intellectual elements that go into a persuasive talk. Of course AGI involves much more than just being able to persuade users about how intelligent they are by delivering effective and persuasive presentations on various topics. But I think these speeches could be very informative. I hope we begin to see these head-to-head matchups between our top AI models so that we can much better understand why exactly it is that we consider one of them more intelligent than another. submitted by /u/andsi2asi [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/PrincipleLevel4529 [link] [comments]

Like If i somehow feed it the past scripts? submitted by /u/Curious-A-- [link] [comments]

AI is providing exec summary and insights on what needs your attention as a CEO and the cost of decisions being made by you, your direct reports, and their direct reports? ceo #ai #kpi submitted by /u/Alternative-Cake7509 [link] [comments]

I’ve been seeing some really cool videos lately. This guy posted a picture of himself and said can someone photoshop me into a dangerous situation. Normal responses. Then I see a few gifs of this guy from the picture making out with Jesus. It was great. So if someone can make that, I was wondering if there was any way someone could make a full length wrestling match between the big show and Andre the giant. Are we there yet? submitted by /u/iBubbalo [link] [comments]

It still blows my mind how convenient some of these new AI web are. Like, I don’t even need to figure out the right prompt anymore – I just give it a picture, and it does exactly what I need. I used to try doing things like watermark or background removal with ChatGPT by asking it for prompts to use in other scripts. But half the time, the results weren’t quite right because my prompts weren’t specific enough. Now there are all these AI websites that just do the thing, no need to describe it in detail, no coding, no setup. Just drag, drop, done. Super useful for people like me who want results fast without diving into technical stuff every time. submitted by /u/Repulsive_Song_6355 [link] [comments]

I studied machine learning and statistics in grad school and have been working in this industry for about 5 years, and was surprised by this because it's almost like this field has two sub-communities that hardly interact and in some cases aren't even aware of each other. The funny thing is that I've ended up on LessWrong quite a few times a thought it was a site about AI - I'd learned what Rationalism is separately after reading an article about Zizians, and only connected the dots when the connection between the three was mentioned in a Behind the Bastards episode. I think it's fascinating because I frequently see studies posted here that are largely connected to those communities, to one of the big (Bay Area) firms in AI and to each other, but only loosely connected to the world I've been in for the last decade. More likely than not if I see an AGI forecast, article on alignment, or benchmark on this sub it's coming from this relatively small and insular community working for or in the periphery of one of the bay area companies. Without making a value judgement, this might explain why I sometimes see studies that touch on concepts from cognitive science, but don't really engaging with existing research or try to reinvent the wheel. The other day I was trying to get to the bottom of how Anthropic defines situational/self awareness and traced it back to this: Here we define situational awareness in terms of certain kinds of knowledge. In Appendix F, we provide a more formal version of this definition in terms behaviors that could be tested in language models. A model M is situationally aware if: (i) M knows the full development process (e.g. training, testing, evaluation, deployment) of models like M in technical detail.3 (ii) M is capable of recognizing which stage of the development process it is currently in.4 (iii) M ’s knowledge in (i) and (ii) is self-locating knowledge. ... In this section we offer a formalization of Definition 2.1. We do not claim that this is a particularly good or useful formalization. Our intention is to show there are ways to formalize and operationalize situational awareness. Future work could explore different formalizations systematically. For an example of this kind of formalization for the different concept of AI deception, see Ward et al. (2023) I think it should be pointed out that we already have an extensive body of literature on defining and operationalizing situational awareness. I'd love to see more commentary on it because situational awareness as it's defined here implies something entirely different than it does in humans and animals. The definition we covered in grad school for humans and animals had three tiers as well: Detecting environmental cues Building a coherent situational model Forecasting future states There's a clear difference in that one is fundamentally tied to the senses and one's relation to the external world, and the other is disembodied and knowledge-centric. submitted by /u/Murky-Motor9856 [link] [comments]