jlapeyre.bsky.social

Yeah, looks like trolling. But versions of that idea go around. It's worth calling it out as BS.

LLMs don’t just count words; they learn the patterns and ideas that make words go together. Predicting the next word makes them internalize meaning. This is explicit in research. They test what’s inside—from grammar to meaning—to measure and compare models. They try to encode the meaning of books.

dapope dot com is already claimed.

Da pope

I lived in Spain. I spent less than 35 days in the US and made less than 120K. You're required to file unless you are no longer a citizen. But you get credit for taxes paid in the Spain, so that you owe zero in the US. This may have changed or may vary by country.

"see him"? I thought you were talking about the dog. I thought, "It's not that small". I had to look a few times to notice the hat. Maybe because it's not the standard M*G* hat. Also, the person's face is so compelling and takes all my attention. I bet at least some others saw it like I did, too.

I've met more than one Harris supporter who does not understand the threat DJT poses for the republic. It seems obvious to many of us. I'm inclined to believe it takes education and years of paying attention to understand it. But I know non-college grads who don't read history, but understand DJT.

The majority of "progressives" believe some destructive, collectively constructed untruths. But the beliefs around Trumpism are far more bizarre, consequential, and dangerous. The "left" has an alternative reality. But the right's is more extreme and hermetic.

I know a DJT voter who: Has lunch with trans friends. Enthused over young black men speaking after G Floyd was killed. Believed: Obama was a closet muslim who would betray his country, DJT is a brilliant peacemaking diplomat, BLM is a scam, Biden is the most dishonest president in history.

The majority of DJT voters don't understand the threat to the Republic. For many the US is a hazy mix of blood and soil and republican ideals. I'd love to see a synthesis of interviews, not at his rallies, but the larger number of his less extreme voters. I mostly read assumptions.

If popular vote and 7 swing states were random, that's 256 outcomes. If 5000 traders make random bets, at least one will be correct. Find the biggest winner, and you've found a genius, and a great story. But it's even easier to win since state outcomes are highly correlated.

Polls overstated Biden's edge by about 4% in 2020. Overstated Clinton's edge similarly in 2016. In 2024, polls showed candidates were even. I saw no claim that the systematic error was identified and corrected. DJT winning the popular vote was predictable.

"Everything can't move away from everything. If you try, something would move toward something else" A spotted balloon is a good answer. You needn't talk about four dimensional spaces. Sure, the spots live on a two-dimensional surface, but I think non-specialists will gain some understanding.