\n\nEn vrac, ce qui a attir\u00e9 mon attention sur le web ces 7 derniers jours.\nSurtout les contenus textuels, car je ne sais pas vraiment quoi faire de ce que je consomme sur sur YouTube.
\nIl y a tout de m\u00eame un certain pattern d'actualit\u00e9 sur les co\u00fbts des Large Language Model.
\n\nLa m\u00eame chose, mais avec une citation choisie et parfois un commentaire.\nCette partie m\u00e9riterait sans doute d'\u00eatre produite au fil de l'eau.\nPas certain que cette version en bloc soit vraiment productive.
\nDe L\u2019Ecole Alsacienne \u00c0 Saint-Jean-De-Passy, Ces Lyc\u00e9es Parisiens Priv\u00e9s Tr\u00e8s Bien Dot\u00e9s Par Rapport Au Public
\n\nInterrog\u00e9, le recteur de Paris, Christophe Kerrero, reste \u00e9vasif sur les \u00e9carts de dotations entre lyc\u00e9es g\u00e9n\u00e9raux et sur le fait que des lyc\u00e9es priv\u00e9s s\u00e9lectifs et socialement privil\u00e9gi\u00e9s se trouvent mieux lotis que des \u00e9tablissements publics qui le sont moins, \u00e0 rebours de la logique de distribution des moyens et de la politique en faveur de la mixit\u00e9 men\u00e9e dans le public. Mais il certifie que les deux enveloppes budg\u00e9taires sont \u00ab strictement paritaires \u00bb, et que la raison est \u00e0 chercher du c\u00f4t\u00e9 de la sp\u00e9cificit\u00e9 de gestion de l\u2019enseignement priv\u00e9.
\n
\n
\nChatGPT and Generative AI Look Like Tech's Next Boom. They Could Be the Next Bubble
\n\nIn a research note, Morgan Stanley analysts compared ChatGPT's cost-per-query to Google's cost-per-search. At an estimated average of $0.02 per query, they estimated that OpenAI's costs are about seven times higher than Google's $0.003 per query.
\nThe difference, the analysts note, is the significance of \"the compute intensity of ChatGPT's natural language models.\"
\nThey added that even if OpenAI has access to the lowest-priced tiers for Azure, the Microsoft cloud service that hosts ChatGPT, queries made on the AI chatbot would still be four times more expensive than an average Google search.
\n
\nJ'aimerais bien lire la note en premi\u00e8re main, mais impossible de savoir comment y acc\u00e9der.
\n
\nAlphabet's Google Margins Could Be at Risk From ChatGPT - Morgan Stanley
\n\nMorgan Stanley estimates ChatGPT's cost per query is $0.02 on average, with the compute intensity of ChatGPT's natural language models that store, recall, analyze, and compile large amounts of text into answers in a natural language format being significant. Meanwhile, their analysis means they estimate that ChatGPT's average cost per query ranges anywhere from $0.004-$0.044.
\n
\nIl est int\u00e9ressant d'avoir \u00e0 la fois la perspective du co\u00fbt de la production du mod\u00e8le pr\u00e9entrain\u00e9 et le co\u00fbt d'usage pour les inf\u00e9rences.
\n
\nHow Much Should You Invest in Influencer Marketing? - Issue 128
\n
\nOpenAI Used Kenyan Workers on Less Than $2 Per Hour to Make ChatGPT Less Toxic
\n\nThe data labelers employed by Sama on behalf of OpenAI were paid a take-home wage of between around $1.32 and $2 per hour depending on seniority and performance. For this story, TIME reviewed hundreds of pages of internal Sama and OpenAI documents, including workers\u2019 payslips, and interviewed four Sama employees who worked on the project. All the employees spoke on condition of anonymity out of concern for their livelihoods.
\n
\n
\nSoftware-Defined Assets
\nAu travail, nous avons choisi Dagster pour l'orchestration de nos traitements de donn\u00e9es.\nL'articulation avec le travail d'analyse ne me semble encore ni vraiment \u00e9vidente ni intuitif.
\n
\nCNET Is Reviewing the Accuracy of All Its AI-Written Articles After Multiple Major Corrections
\n\nUsually, when an editor approaches an article (particularly an explainer as basic as \u201cWhat is Compound Interest\u201d), it\u2019s safe to assume that the writer has done their best to provide accurate information. But with AI, there is no intent, only the product. An editor evaluating an AI-generated text cannot assume anything, and instead has to take an exacting, critical eye to every phrase, world, and punctuation mark. It\u2019s a different type of task from editing a person, and one people might not be well-equipped for, considering the degree of complete, unfailing attention it must take and the high volume CNET seems to be aiming for with its ChatGPT-produced stories.
\n
\n
\nThe Shit Show
\n\nLike my mom, the API has been declining for awhile. Endpoints were removed, new features were unavailable to third parties, and rate limiting restricted what we could do. And like my mom, we struggled on and did the best we could, trying to stay upbeat about it all.
\n
\nLe drama twitter continue. Les API ont \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9branch\u00e9es pour les applications iPhone et Android qui ont pourtant \u00e9t\u00e9 un vecteur d'acquisition de nouveaux publics.\nIl est int\u00e9ressant que cela soit une d\u00e9cision plut\u00f4t qu'un incident technique.\nPas encore la fin de la partie, mais on s'en rapproche.
\n
\nAI Art Tools Stable Diffusion and Midjourney Targeted With Copyright Lawsuit
\n\nButterick and Saveri are currently suing Microsoft, GitHub, and OpenAI in a similar case involving the AI programming model CoPilot, which is trained on lines of code collected from the web.
\n
\n
\nThe 25 Best Amazon Prime Shows Right Now
\n\nWhether the ongoing story nails the landing remains to be seen, but for sheer high fantasy spectacle, there\u2019s nothing better at the moment.
\n
\nJ'\u00e9tais assez \u00e9tonn\u00e9 du titre connaissant la mauvaise qualit\u00e9 du catalogue d'amazon et du four qu'est The Ring of Power.\nJ'ai essay\u00e9 d'appr\u00e9cier cette s\u00e9rie et pourtant j'ai abandonn\u00e9 au bout de quelques \u00e9pisodes.
\n
\nHow to (Finally) Break That Bad Habit
\n\nIf your chosen way to try and break your habit isn\u2019t working, maybe it\u2019s time to try something else. Another thing to keep in mind is that \u201cfor some specific behaviors, like quitting smoking, multiple attempts is actually a good thing,\u201d Wood says. \u201cBecause most people who ultimately quit have to keep trying until they figure out the right thing that will work for them.\u201d
\n
\nJe pourrai me dire que lire ce genre d'article est une mauvaise habitude.\nDes fois cela m'aide, mais je me retrouve assez r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement \u00e0 partager mes r\u00e9flexions sur ce qui marche \u00e0 des proches.\nCela me semble alors toujours un peu hors sol sur le moment.
\n
\nA Note About My Article on Goitein With Respect to Zettelkasten Output Processes
\n\nWhile the majority of the article is broadly straightforward stringing together of facts, one of the interesting insights for me was connecting a broader range of idiosyncratic note taking and writing practices together across time and space to the idea of statistical mechanics. This is slowly adding to a broader thesis I\u2019m developing about the evolving life of these knowledge practices over time. I can\u2019t wait to see what develops from this next.
\n
\n
\nPlayacting Genius: The Performative Logic of Reasoning From First Principles
\n\nThe history of almost every non-trivial field is full of dead ends and bad ideas that were impossible to predict before the fact. Genuinely reasoning about the field from first principles will regularly lead you into one of these dead ends.
\nThis is why that annoying coworker alternates between interesting observation and inane idiocies. Their speedrun through various fields sometimes leads them into interesting corners and sometimes into dead ends. Your problem is that you don\u2019t know whether or not their interesting observations are dead ends that you simply don\u2019t recognise because it\u2019s in a field unfamiliar to you.
\n
\n
\nStop Feeding the Hype and Start Resisting
\n\nAcademics should be a voice of reason; uphold values such as scientific integrity, critical reflection, and public responsibility. Especially in this moment in history, it is vital that we provide our students with the critical thinking skills that will allow them to recognise misleading claims made by tech companies and understand the limits and risks of hyped and harmful technology that is made mainstream at a dazzling speed and on a frightening scale.
\n
\nUne lecture assez importante de ces derni\u00e8res semaines.\nNon pas seulement sur les derni\u00e8res modes en \"intelligence artificielle\", mais pour les technologies en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral. Il faut savoir revenir au temps long.
\n
\nWhen Did the Anthropocene Actually Begin?
\n\nDefining the Anthropocene is vital, researchers say, because it brings together all the impacts of humans on the world, thereby providing a platform for holistic understanding and, hopefully, action to repair the damage. From a scientific perspective, a precise definition is essential for a clear basis for debate.
\n
\n",
"content-plain": "Histoire de d\u00e9buter l'\u00e9criture de bilans hebdomadaires, je vais commencer par un r\u00e9capitulatif de ce que j'ai vu, lu, jou\u00e9, bref, consomm\u00e9 cette derni\u00e8re semaine. Mon intention est surtout d'avoir un regard r\u00e9flexif sur ce qui a attir\u00e9 mon attention et par la suite o\u00f9 est-ce que j'ai moi-m\u00eame fait attention.\n\nC'est une premi\u00e8re it\u00e9ration que j'ai compil\u00e9e \u00e0 la main. Peut-\u00eatre que cela vaudra le coup d'automatiser quelques passages et d'ajouter des informations comme le temps de lecture. Relire et faire un travail de re-passage a \u00e9galement ses vertus.\n lire\nJ'ai continu\u00e9 et sur le point de finir A Wall of Storms de Ken Liu.\nC'est une lecture que je regrette et que j'aimerai d\u00e9velopper dans une note \u00e0 part.\n\nJ'ai commenc\u00e9 la lecture Mostly Harmless Econometrics de Joshua Angrist et J\u00f6rn-Steffen Pischke.\nC'est ardu, mais c'est ce que je cherchais. Cela me donne \u00e0 voir mes outils statistiques sous un nouvel \u00e9clairage o\u00f9 je me trouve dor\u00e9navant na\u00eff.\n\nJ'ai lu d'une traite Chiffre d'Olivier Martin.\nC'\u00e9tait \u00e0 la fois tr\u00e8s synth\u00e9tique et tr\u00e8s juste. Cela me conforte dans ma posture entre statistiques et critique sociale.\n \u00e9couter Food Is Art. So Why Do People Treat It Differently? - The Dave Chang Show lire le web\nEn vrac, ce qui a attir\u00e9 mon attention sur le web ces 7 derniers jours. Surtout les contenus textuels, car je ne sais pas vraiment quoi faire de ce que je consomme sur sur YouTube.\n\nIl y a tout de m\u00eame un certain pattern d'actualit\u00e9 sur les co\u00fbts des Large Language Model.\n De L\u2019Ecole Alsacienne \u00c0 Saint-Jean-De-Passy, Ces Lyc\u00e9es Parisiens Priv\u00e9s Tr\u00e8s Bien Dot\u00e9s Par Rapport Au Public ChatGPT and Generative AI Look Like Tech's Next Boom. They Could Be the Next Bubble Alphabet's Google Margins Could Be at Risk From ChatGPT - Morgan Stanley How Much Should You Invest in Influencer Marketing? - Issue 128 OpenAI Used Kenyan Workers on Less Than $2 Per Hour to Make ChatGPT Less Toxic Software-Defined Assets CNET Is Reviewing the Accuracy of All Its AI-Written Articles After Multiple Major Corrections The Shit Show AI Art Tools Stable Diffusion and Midjourney Targeted With Copyright Lawsuit The 25 Best Amazon Prime Shows Right Now How to (Finally) Break That Bad Habit A Note About My Article on Goitein With Respect to Zettelkasten Output Processes Playacting Genius: The Performative Logic of Reasoning From First Principles Stop Feeding the Hype and Start Resisting When Did the Anthropocene Actually Begin?\nLa m\u00eame chose, mais avec une citation choisie et parfois un commentaire. Cette partie m\u00e9riterait sans doute d'\u00eatre produite au fil de l'eau. Pas certain que cette version en bloc soit vraiment productive.\n\nDe L\u2019Ecole Alsacienne \u00c0 Saint-Jean-De-Passy, Ces Lyc\u00e9es Parisiens Priv\u00e9s Tr\u00e8s Bien Dot\u00e9s Par Rapport Au Public\n\nInterrog\u00e9, le recteur de Paris, Christophe Kerrero, reste \u00e9vasif sur les \u00e9carts de dotations entre lyc\u00e9es g\u00e9n\u00e9raux et sur le fait que des lyc\u00e9es priv\u00e9s s\u00e9lectifs et socialement privil\u00e9gi\u00e9s se trouvent mieux lotis que des \u00e9tablissements publics qui le sont moins, \u00e0 rebours de la logique de distribution des moyens et de la politique en faveur de la mixit\u00e9 men\u00e9e dans le public. Mais il certifie que les deux enveloppes budg\u00e9taires sont \u00ab strictement paritaires \u00bb, et que la raison est \u00e0 chercher du c\u00f4t\u00e9 de la sp\u00e9cificit\u00e9 de gestion de l\u2019enseignement priv\u00e9.\n\nChatGPT and Generative AI Look Like Tech's Next Boom. They Could Be the Next Bubble\n\nIn a research note, Morgan Stanley analysts compared ChatGPT's cost-per-query to Google's cost-per-search. At an estimated average of $0.02 per query, they estimated that OpenAI's costs are about seven times higher than Google's $0.003 per query.\n\nThe difference, the analysts note, is the significance of \"the compute intensity of ChatGPT's natural language models.\"\n\nThey added that even if OpenAI has access to the lowest-priced tiers for Azure, the Microsoft cloud service that hosts ChatGPT, queries made on the AI chatbot would still be four times more expensive than an average Google search.\n\nJ'aimerais bien lire la note en premi\u00e8re main, mais impossible de savoir comment y acc\u00e9der.\n\nAlphabet's Google Margins Could Be at Risk From ChatGPT - Morgan Stanley\n\nMorgan Stanley estimates ChatGPT's cost per query is $0.02 on average, with the compute intensity of ChatGPT's natural language models that store, recall, analyze, and compile large amounts of text into answers in a natural language format being significant. Meanwhile, their analysis means they estimate that ChatGPT's average cost per query ranges anywhere from $0.004-$0.044.\n\nIl est int\u00e9ressant d'avoir \u00e0 la fois la perspective du co\u00fbt de la production du mod\u00e8le pr\u00e9entrain\u00e9 et le co\u00fbt d'usage pour les inf\u00e9rences.\n\nHow Much Should You Invest in Influencer Marketing? - Issue 128\n\nOpenAI Used Kenyan Workers on Less Than $2 Per Hour to Make ChatGPT Less Toxic\n\nThe data labelers employed by Sama on behalf of OpenAI were paid a take-home wage of between around $1.32 and $2 per hour depending on seniority and performance. For this story, TIME reviewed hundreds of pages of internal Sama and OpenAI documents, including workers\u2019 payslips, and interviewed four Sama employees who worked on the project. All the employees spoke on condition of anonymity out of concern for their livelihoods.\n\nSoftware-Defined Assets\n\nAu travail, nous avons choisi Dagster pour l'orchestration de nos traitements de donn\u00e9es. L'articulation avec le travail d'analyse ne me semble encore ni vraiment \u00e9vidente ni intuitif.\n\nCNET Is Reviewing the Accuracy of All Its AI-Written Articles After Multiple Major Corrections\n\nUsually, when an editor approaches an article (particularly an explainer as basic as \u201cWhat is Compound Interest\u201d), it\u2019s safe to assume that the writer has done their best to provide accurate information. But with AI, there is no intent, only the product. An editor evaluating an AI-generated text cannot assume anything, and instead has to take an exacting, critical eye to every phrase, world, and punctuation mark. It\u2019s a different type of task from editing a person, and one people might not be well-equipped for, considering the degree of complete, unfailing attention it must take and the high volume CNET seems to be aiming for with its ChatGPT-produced stories.\n\nThe Shit Show\n\nLike my mom, the API has been declining for awhile. Endpoints were removed, new features were unavailable to third parties, and rate limiting restricted what we could do. And like my mom, we struggled on and did the best we could, trying to stay upbeat about it all.\n\nLe drama twitter continue. Les API ont \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9branch\u00e9es pour les applications iPhone et Android qui ont pourtant \u00e9t\u00e9 un vecteur d'acquisition de nouveaux publics. Il est int\u00e9ressant que cela soit une d\u00e9cision plut\u00f4t qu'un incident technique. Pas encore la fin de la partie, mais on s'en rapproche.\n\nAI Art Tools Stable Diffusion and Midjourney Targeted With Copyright Lawsuit\n\nButterick and Saveri are currently suing Microsoft, GitHub, and OpenAI in a similar case involving the AI programming model CoPilot, which is trained on lines of code collected from the web.\n\nThe 25 Best Amazon Prime Shows Right Now\n\nWhether the ongoing story nails the landing remains to be seen, but for sheer high fantasy spectacle, there\u2019s nothing better at the moment.\n\nJ'\u00e9tais assez \u00e9tonn\u00e9 du titre connaissant la mauvaise qualit\u00e9 du catalogue d'amazon et du four qu'est The Ring of Power. J'ai essay\u00e9 d'appr\u00e9cier cette s\u00e9rie et pourtant j'ai abandonn\u00e9 au bout de quelques \u00e9pisodes.\n\nHow to (Finally) Break That Bad Habit\n\nIf your chosen way to try and break your habit isn\u2019t working, maybe it\u2019s time to try something else. Another thing to keep in mind is that \u201cfor some specific behaviors, like quitting smoking, multiple attempts is actually a good thing,\u201d Wood says. \u201cBecause most people who ultimately quit have to keep trying until they figure out the right thing that will work for them.\u201d\n\nJe pourrai me dire que lire ce genre d'article est une mauvaise habitude. Des fois cela m'aide, mais je me retrouve assez r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement \u00e0 partager mes r\u00e9flexions sur ce qui marche \u00e0 des proches. Cela me semble alors toujours un peu hors sol sur le moment.\n\nA Note About My Article on Goitein With Respect to Zettelkasten Output Processes\n\nWhile the majority of the article is broadly straightforward stringing together of facts, one of the interesting insights for me was connecting a broader range of idiosyncratic note taking and writing practices together across time and space to the idea of statistical mechanics. This is slowly adding to a broader thesis I\u2019m developing about the evolving life of these knowledge practices over time. I can\u2019t wait to see what develops from this next.\n\nPlayacting Genius: The Performative Logic of Reasoning From First Principles\n\nThe history of almost every non-trivial field is full of dead ends and bad ideas that were impossible to predict before the fact. Genuinely reasoning about the field from first principles will regularly lead you into one of these dead ends.\n\nThis is why that annoying coworker alternates between interesting observation and inane idiocies. Their speedrun through various fields sometimes leads them into interesting corners and sometimes into dead ends. Your problem is that you don\u2019t know whether or not their interesting observations are dead ends that you simply don\u2019t recognise because it\u2019s in a field unfamiliar to you.\n\nStop Feeding the Hype and Start Resisting\n\nAcademics should be a voice of reason; uphold values such as scientific integrity, critical reflection, and public responsibility. Especially in this moment in history, it is vital that we provide our students with the critical thinking skills that will allow them to recognise misleading claims made by tech companies and understand the limits and risks of hyped and harmful technology that is made mainstream at a dazzling speed and on a frightening scale.\n\nUne lecture assez importante de ces derni\u00e8res semaines. Non pas seulement sur les derni\u00e8res modes en \"intelligence artificielle\", mais pour les technologies en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral. Il faut savoir revenir au temps long.\n\nWhen Did the Anthropocene Actually Begin?\n\nDefining the Anthropocene is vital, researchers say, because it brings together all the impacts of humans on the world, thereby providing a platform for holistic understanding and, hopefully, action to repair the damage. From a scientific perspective, a precise definition is essential for a clear basis for debate.",
"syndication": [],
"type": "entry",
"name": "2023w03"
}