almost! the editor/compositor is fully browser side, but the server is doing real work: project.json lives on disk (thats the whole point, any agent or script can edit it and fs.watch + sse hot reloads the ui), plus ffmpeg for the final export encode. so it needs the local server for the actual workflow.
a hosted demo mode is a good idea though, project in localstorage + sample footage + mediarecorder export would let people feel the editor without cloning. the one thing it cant show is the main trick, watching an external agent rebuild your timeline live, since theres no local file for it to edit. might do a stripped demo build if theres interest
Not knowledgable, but irradiated flies should not be expected to be irradiated again. There are 3 population pools:
1. The Factory spawning population - This is self-sustained, and never encounters radiation.
2. A subset of the spawned males from the factory population are irradiated, making them sterile.
3. The wild population, consisting of the sterile males + wild males + wild females.
If for some reason the sterile population is not fully sterile (unlikely), then maybe there is a gene that helps for radiation resistance, but the children of that strain will not encounter radiation, so it fades away.
The factories are not going out to the regions where the flies are deployed to get new fly studs.
There can be selection pressure for females to mate with multiple males.
Releasing sterile males only works for species that mate only once or at most twice, and rapidly falls off in effectiveness for species where the females mate many times.
but some tokens are not really needed? This is probably bad because it is mismatched with training set, but if you trained a model on a dataset removing all prepositions (or whatever caveman speak is), would you have a performance degradation compared to the same model trained on the same dataset without the caveman translation?
> How do they audit that Anthropic can't alter model outputs for contexts they (the ethics board or whatever it's called, can't remember) don't like?
I was thinking that Anthropic would just be providing the models/setup support to run their models in aws gov cloud. They do not have any real insight into what is being asked. Maybe a few engineers have the specific clearances to access and debug the running systems, but that would one or two people who are embedded to debug inference issues - not something that would be analyzed by others in the company.
The whole 'do not use our models for mass surveillance' is at the end of the day an honor system. Companies have no real way of enforcing that clause, or determining that it has been violated. That being said, at least historically, one has been able to trust the government to abide by commercial agreements. The people who work in cleared positions are generally selected for honesty, and ability, willingness to follow rules.
I think what you are describing is technically possible (not my immediate domain, however). They don't have real-time insight into what the model is being used for, you are correct about this afaik. But the incident that kicked off this paranoia was Anthopic calling around after the fact to try to find out how JSOC was using the model during the Maduro raid. None of the context of those questions are public, and I doubt they will become public, but it stands to reason that the nature of the questions was concerning enough for the War Department to cause them insist on the "any lawful use" language to be inserted into the contract.
>The whole 'do not use our models for mass surveillance' is at the end of the day an honor system. Companies have no real way of enforcing that clause, or determining that it has been violated.
You are also correct here imo, with one important caveat. Even if private companies have the means for enforcing that clause, it is not their business to do so. Maybe that's the crux of the problem, one of perspective. The for-profit entity in these arrangements is not and can never be trusted as the mechanism of enforcement for whatever we, as a republic, decide are the rules. That is the realm of elected government. Anthropic employees are certainly making their voice heard on how they believe these tools should be used, but, again, this is an is versus ought problem for them.
In the field of Geophysical Fluid Dynamics it is an important distinction as there are other very important waves. Rossby waves are not gravity waves and extremely important to the global climate (see their role in ENSO dynamics). Compressive waves (acoustic waves) are everywhere of course. There are also topographic Rossby waves, internal waves and Kelvin waves (note: kelvin waves and internal waves are gravity waves as well). Oh, and inertial waves!
Hubble just spotted a "bullseye" galaxy where a smaller galaxy passed through the center and caused ripples in the gas bobbing with gravity, like dropping a stone in a pond:
reply