Investing General Discussion

Captain Suave

Captain Suave

Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris.
5,694
9,786
Sanrith Descartes said:
[Grok:]

LLMs aren’t perfect. They can hallucinate facts
...
Google and Bing thrive on the free, ad-driven model—billions of users, monetized through targeted ads tied to search and browsing habits. It’s a machine that’s worked for 20+ years, pulling in $224 billion for Google alone in 2023.
Click to expand...

Well, at least it's honest. What's $14 billion here and there between friends?

1742399782351.png

(yes, I checked against Alphabet's earnings statements)

I don't see how anyone can trust these things for any purpose involving numbers.
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users
Sanrith Descartes

Sanrith Descartes

You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
<Gold Donor>
46,946
132,221
Captain Suave said:
Well, at least it's honest. What's $14 billion here and there between friends?

View attachment 578547
(yes, I checked against Alphabet's earnings statements)

I don't see how anyone can trust these things for any purpose involving numbers.
Click to expand...
What I dont get is its programmed. How hard is it to program it to say "I dont have the answer to that math/financial question". I should ask it why.
 
Flobee

Flobee

Vyemm Raider
2,805
3,270
Gen-X's version of believing everything on Fox News is going to be blindly relying on AI for answers. Its a useful tool in a number of circumstances but citing it as factual is foolish. Especially so when one pastes its responses in an argument lol.

More on topic I suspect market bounces soonish purely based on global liquidity uptick.
 
Arden

Arden

Blackwing Lair Raider
2,888
2,169
Flobee said:
Gen-X's version of believing everything on Fox News is going to be blindly relying on AI for answers. Its a useful tool in a number of circumstances but citing it as factual is foolish. Especially so when one pastes its responses in an argument lol.

More on topic I suspect market bounces soonish purely based on global liquidity uptick.
Click to expand...

Not sure anyone is suggesting that you should blindly rely on AI. You shouldn't blindy rely on anything- AI, TV, News, radio, books, conversations with people on the Internet.

AI is just a tool, and it happens to be really good (and fast) at aggregation info sources on the net and proving you with a succinct answer to your query.

If your AI is good, it will use typically reliable sources and provide you with citations so you can back check the facts it provides.

Being skeptical of ANY information source is wise these days, but automatically dismissing new tech just because it's new just makes you seem like a luddite.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users
Captain Suave

Captain Suave

Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris.
5,694
9,786
Sanrith Descartes said:
What I dont get is its programmed. How hard is it to program it to say "I dont have the answer to that math/financial question". I should ask it why.
Click to expand...

My wife runs an AI department (though not building LLMs). She says the correct solution is to identify specific factual elements of output and check those against a database of sourced links derived from traditional search, or refer to rigorous calculation engines a la Wolfram Alpha. This are already such products available in enterprise settings, within narrow domains. It's not part of general purpose public-facing ChatGPT/Grok/etc. for reasons of cost, complexity, and scale of engineering. They don't plaster caveats everywhere because it sells better. (I think Perplexity is working in this direction. I haven't tried it.)

I still think it's a major product design fail to have released in this state without guardrails. It's going to badly degrade future confidence even when precise implementations are eventually available. It'll be like asking people to trust self-driving cars after they've been marketed as functional and yet predictably crash. "Trust us this time, really!"
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
Tmac

Tmac

Adventurer
<Aristocrat╭ರ_•́>
10,295
18,007
Sanrith Descartes said:
What I dont get is it’s programmed. How hard is it to program it to say "I dont have the answer to that math/financial question". I should ask it why.
Click to expand...

That’s not how they work. They don’t actually know how to tell it to do that so directly. Their only option is to train bias into it.

There’s entire departments at universities that are studying how LLM’s work trying to reverse engineer their internals so they can tell it stuff.

I have a buddy who’s getting his PhD in this stuff and is on the same floor as the British equivalent of OpenAI. He talks about LLM’s in scary ways.
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
Blazin

Blazin

Creative Title
<Nazi Janitors>
7,421
37,339
Sanrith Descartes said:
Lets see if the S&P can bust through the 200.
Click to expand...
not ready for that, need some calming consolidation below before the move up. Does it too soon and it will just get smacked down. End of week is what matters. We may get the close at the 200d and wake up monday to either break out or break down.

Anything possible, gamma flip just up overhead. If it does break above it we would get some crazy breadth thrusts multiple 80% up days , I just don't see how declining 20d and the 200d aren't going to act as resistance for a bit.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users
Jysin

Jysin

Bronze Baronet of the Realm
6,851
5,035
Largest OpEx in history coming on Friday. I would wait for Monday to really get a sense of direction.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users
Haus

Haus

I am Big Balls!
<Gold Donor>
14,991
61,112
Arden said:
Maybe, but he will realistically be close to 70 (or older) by the time something like that happens. That's not old in the grand scheme of things but it would be pretty old for such a dangerous/difficult flight.

Not saying it won't happen, just saying he's racing against the clock for sure.
Click to expand...
I'm trying to find his original tweet on the topics but...

I believe Elon intimated that missions to Mars carrying Optimus androids would be first, and should happen in the next 2 years, then we have another window to wait until it's proper for more launches to Mars, so that if the Optimus androids can work on the surface or Mars and prep things the goal would be humans around 2031.

Ah, here we go. Elon's optimistic goals :
 
Captain Suave

Captain Suave

Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris.
5,694
9,786
Haus said:
I'm trying to find his original tweet on the topics but...

I believe Elon intimated that missions to Mars carrying Optimus androids would be first, and should happen in the next 2 years, then we have another window to wait until it's proper for more launches to Mars, so that if the Optimus androids can work on the surface or Mars and prep things the goal would be humans around 2031.

Ah, here we go. Elon's optimistic goals :
Click to expand...


I've got a cousin at SpaceX and for whatever his opinion is worth he thinks that's crazy optimistic. More realistic is first missions in the 2030's with humans closer to 2040.
 
  • 1Paper Hands
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 users
Lambourne

Lambourne

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
3,180
7,418
Back in 2015 (when Tim Urban's great article series came out) Musk said 2025 or 2027 for a human to step on Mars. If that slides to around 2030 I would still consider that a success. Might well have been never in our lifetime by the way space travel was going for a while. Only 6 people are still alive that have gone beyond low earth orbit, the youngest of them is 89 years old.

Putting a human on Mars in and of itself isn't the real revolution Musk has brought to spaceflight, it's the lowering of cost per kg to orbit by several orders of magnitude. This opens up all sorts of new opportunities for satellite based services and also the chance for ordinary people to travel to space (it still won't be cheap but expensive is better than not available).



1742464951100.png


This is a great article series, even 10 years after it came out. Not everything has gone to plan but a lot has.


waitbutwhy.com

How (and Why) SpaceX Will Colonize Mars — Wait But Why

One of life’s great leaps may be just around the corner.
waitbutwhy.com waitbutwhy.com
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
tugofpeace

tugofpeace

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
915
2,048
Blazin said:
not ready for that, need some calming consolidation below before the move up. Does it too soon and it will just get smacked down. End of week is what matters. We may get the close at the 200d and wake up monday to either break out or break down.

Anything possible, gamma flip just up overhead. If it does break above it we would get some crazy breadth thrusts multiple 80% up days , I just don't see how declining 20d and the 200d aren't going to act as resistance for a bit.
Click to expand...
Sorry. 80% up days?
 
Jysin

Jysin

Bronze Baronet of the Realm
6,851
5,035
tugofpeace said:
Sorry. 80% up days?
Click to expand...
He is referring to breadth. As in 80% names in the NYSE / NASDAQ trading green on a day. Opposite of this is when we have just a few names like the Mag7 dragging the indexes up, while most other names are in the red.

Today's breadth:

1742486554729.png
 
  • 2Like
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 2 users
Blazin

Blazin

Creative Title
<Nazi Janitors>
7,421
37,339
I've been doing a sort of barbell approach to this correction. I have some shares just holding long, have 500 shares of QQQ that I'm attempting to flip if I get caught long so be it but if I can make a handful of flips it can really help in the long run. I just bought back some that I had sold yesterday that if we can get a nice ramp tomorrow in the morning I'll probably sell again.

With one day to go and triple witching at that, us finishing above the 200d this week seems unlikely. Think the best we can hope for is to be in striking distance and put in a green weekly candle . Bulls want to see a weekly close above 485 for QQQ what we don't want to see is a new low, price to watch there is 466, a close down near that level would certainly increase concern, sentiment is still shit
 
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 1 user
Jysin

Jysin

Bronze Baronet of the Realm
6,851
5,035
Bloomberg reporting 4.5 Trillion in options expiring today.

Hugely skewed for negative gamma on the SPY.

Should be a fun day.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions: 2 users
Jysin

Jysin

Bronze Baronet of the Realm
6,851
5,035
Well, 4 Billion buy side MOC. No put side armageddon. Enjoy the weekend.
 
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 1 user
You must log in or register to reply here.