Recent comments in /f/technology

AlpLyr t1_j8660lm wrote

In what sense does ‘matrices grow exponentially’, let alone ‘by definition’?

If you’re takling about the number of entries in an n by n matrix where n increases. That grows quadratically. Fast, but not exponential.

3

gk99 t1_j865nry wrote

I didn't use either of those but tbh Thunderbird was pretty easy to understand right up until I realized I had no reason to use it. Transferred from my ISP-provided email to Gmail and most of my email is phone-convenient, anything that needs to be done on desktop I can get to by just typing "gmail" into my browser and clicking the first link.

9

tyler9132 t1_j86510z wrote

Can someone tell me why you think thunderbird does not have good performance? I’ve noticed it’s super fast and reliable. Outlook sucks. Every single client I do tech support for has some issue with outlook at one point that interferes with their work. It NEVER works. Thunderbird on the other hand, never once had an issue. And it’s autodiscover actually works where outlook, on 2 different computers, could not find an exchange account.

8

WeekendCautious3377 t1_j864j33 wrote

Yes and no. Google’s latest LLM model handles 540 billion parameters. Linear algebra is literally as simple as y = a*x + b. But you do billions of it every time with input that you don’t 100% understand. For instance, it is easy to record a person’s voice and give that file in a form of a series of numbers. You give hundreds of thousands of voice records to these models and it evolves these giant matrices that are billions in size. Model (giant matrix) goes through a bunch of iterations per input to optimize itself and picks up nuances of a human voice embedded in the digital form.

You can then tell the program to group together different input by patterns like accents. Now you have multiple models optimized to speak in different accents.

If you had billions of people each only looking at one parameter at a time, it would be feasible to follow each “simple” algebra. But you literally need billions of people looking at it. There are better ways to find overall inferences.

You can think of it as just like trying to analyze any big system.

Traffic in LA? You can definitely look at each person’s car and eventually figure out how each person made a decision to drive in what way. But that will not solve the problem of traffic problem of the overall city of millions of people driving.

Only AI problem is orders of magnitude more complicated.

11