The difference is the the joint embedding of actions and state which are fined tuned for certain outcomes. The bulk of the weights are just a forward pass on an LLM (Nemotron).
is that how jev works too? how do these differences make those approaches more "instinctive and emotional"? I know they're different on a technical level, I'm asking which characteristic difference necessitates the use of this loaded term from pop psych
Oh, an LLM forward pass is also like system1. The action embedding just makes it more useful for tasks or classification. If it has a small fixed computation budget it's similar to system1 than system2 (like a thinking budget, or agent harness).
System 1 is quite informative about what it's for. It means it's a system designed for bounded time quick classification, vs. agentic unbounded or slow thinking with scratchpads and tools.
Does it inject thoughts into system 2 without system 2 knowing about it? Does it have instinctive social skills? Can it do instinctive arithmetic? The list goes on, there’s a nice book about it…
Yeah, the github landing page is much less misleading and clearly says this. I don't know why they try to make the marketing page gloss over this detail... it speaks to the mindset of the authors.
Wynes & Nicholas downgraded electricity sourcing to "questionable merit." Table 1 gives a range of under 100 kg to 2,500 kg CO₂e saved per year, depending on the default CO2 intensity of the state/country you are living in.
A plant-based diet is one of their high-impact lifestyle choices.
It sounds like you agree with the criticism that your title is a bunch of baloney, but somehow think that's not your fault? You wrote the lies in that title, not an algorithm.
reply