I have used BLOOM a little, and I struggle to get it to produce the same kind of output as GPT-3. Anyone have tips there? It often seems to not keep the right context of the previously generated text.
GPT-3 has been fine-tuned after release to better interpret prompts (see InstructGPT). Perhaps Bloom is more like the original GPT-3; a little more raw and requiring better prompt engineering?
In my small amount of testing of Bloom so far it seems capable of advanced behaviour but it can indeed be trickier to coax that out. Playing with temperature and sampling matters for sure.
I got an intestinal parasite (Ascaris -https://www.cdc.gov/parasites/ascariasis/index.html) while in University here in Canada. I was minding my business one day, I looked down into the toilet water, and there was a little wormy in my stool. I fished it out and went the ER. The doctor was fascinated cause I don't think they see this so often.
Who knows where I picked it up. The most likely culprit was the dorm cafeteria I was living in. With the open salad bars and the sharing of serving utensils, it is an ideal location to spread some fecal.
As far as I know, you can get some parasites (not sure about Ascaris specifically) just from walking around barefoot.
I know they aren't really that dangerous unless you have a really high worm load, or you're unlucky and one ends up in a part of your body where it doesn't normally live, but their lifecycle is thoroughly disgusting and terrifying. Definitely something I've stayed up at night freaking out about at a few points in my life.
No. the larvae that would infect humans aren't competent swimmers. If you are a little zooplankton predator like a copepod, there would be little L2 stage roundworm larvae of various species whipping about (after having hatched from eggs that came out of a larger predator's gut) trying to attract attention and get eaten so they could continue the lifecycle (often, they'd need to get eaten by at least one larger predator to mature).
There are Ascaris-like worms in water that can affect humans, see: Anisakis. But you wouldn't get infected by larvae in the environment, you'd have to eat undercooked fish that ate the zooplankton that ate the L2 worms and get infected through the gut once they are L3 stage.
Ah - Dracunculus aka guinea worm is a another you could get from water, but you'd need to actually drink the copepods.
The Canadian telecom space is dominated by 3 primary companies -- Telus, Bell, and Rogers. They form an effective oligopoly that is quite detrimental to the Canadian consumer.
In the ISP space, there is a bit more competition. Namely, Shaw provides additional coverage in some regions of the country. However, Rogers wants to buy Shaw. You can imagine how bad that will be for Canadians.
I do wonder what the Rogers outage is about. Ransomeware? State attack? Something stupid? If anything, it shows how we should not have critical infrastructure centralized. Competition between ISPs is important.
In the ISP world, what will happen with Rogers buying Shaw...
In the western provinces, AB and BC, Rogers runs a very widespread and strong LTE network. What they do not have is a DOCSIS3/coax and GPON cable TV plant. Nor do they have much terrestrial right of way for aerial plant or underground in conduits, which is where Telus (the historical copper POTS ILEC) and Shaw (the historical cable TV operator going back to the mid 1970s) are by far the strongest.
Rogers is a facilities based last mile cable operator/terrestrial operator in Ontario.
Shaw runs the landline cable tv networks in most of the metro Vancouver area. And many other small to mid sized cities in the west.
Letting Rogers control both one of the largest/strongest mobile phone networks and the only viable land line terrestrial broadband competitor to Telus by acquiring Shaw's cable tv plant is an absolute outrage.
To use a USA analogy, it's like if T-Mobile already owned RCN (Astound) in some big part of the country and then proceeded to buy Comcast.
Or if Verizon bought Spectrum (Charter/historical TWTC cable).
Yes. I wonder if the author had first worked on the patent side (I'd be interested to hear more about this idea). Perhaps working on patents first would be a path to get experience (and product-market-fit). From there, one could branch out into other domains (e.g. bio).
Balaji Srinivasan had a good take on this recently in his conversation with Tim Ferris. I quote:
"The thing is, I don’t care if something has a thousand retweets, what I care about is if it has two or three independent confirmations from economically dis-aligned actors. This is the same as academia, by the way, everybody’s optimizing citations. What you actually want to optimize is independent replication. That’s what true science is. It’s not peer review. It is physical tests."
Yes and no. Literal replications are less valuable than people think - what you really want are independent tests of different parts of the causal network of the underlying model.
You're wrong. They are completing bitcoin transactions on lightning network, which is built upon the base bitcoin block chain (it's a layer two). Thus, the cost of spending bitcoin for some chicken wings is virtually free.
