Comment by Chaosvex
1 day ago
I'm not wrong. It's been removed elsewhere for being LLM generated. This discussion has already been had multiple times.
The author used Claude to generate it and instructed it to intentionally insert mistakes. They had comments posted on Reddit that discussed doing this and their account is a slew of AI generated responses. The short responses where it appears they didn't use AI don't reflect the behaviour you'd expect from somebody that claims to have over 30 years of experience in HFT but rather point toward them being a teenager or somebody rather immature. They also make a number of wild claims that when put together, are unlikely to be true.
Sorry if you can't recognise it for what it is and shame on you if it's your website, given that you've previously submitted content from there.
Funny this predates even the original paper first introducing the attention mechanism underpinning modern LLM.
What are you talking about? Are you claiming ~two weeks ago predates LLMs or am I misinterpreting what you're trying to say?
You're talking past each other, about different articles.
1 reply →
You could have elaborated the way you did here to begin with.
> shame on you if it's your website, given that you've previously submitted content from there
How do you jump to such a conclusion without evidence? Has somebody hurt your feelings on the Internet?