You can generally toggle LLM “grounding” features, aka inserting web searches into their context.
Modern LLMs have a information “cutoff” of a few months ago, at the latest, so the base models will have zero awareness of this formula.
TBH it’s probably human written.
I used to write small articles for a tech news outlet on the side (HardOCP), and the entire site went under well before the AI boom because no one can compete with conveyer belts of of thoughtless SEO garbage, especially when Google promotes it.
Point being, this was a problem well before the rise of LLMs.
In this case, it’s as simple as “type it into ChatGPT, like the Reddit users did” :/
That they didn’t try to replicate it.
How about the outlet checks and finds out?
I did, and I couldn’t get low-temperature Gemini or a local LLM to replicate it, and not all the tariffs seem to be based on the trade deficit ratio, though some suspiciously are.
Sorry, but this is a button of mine, outlets that ask stupidly easy to verify questions but dont even try. No, just cite people on Reddit and Twitter…
I’m all for “it’s benefitting the billionaires,” and that’s what tariffs do, but most of the ultra-wealthy’s money is tied up in the market, too. It’s more that this is a regressive tax to fund cuts to progressive taxes, fucking shit up is not the intent.
Some of the administration’s actions really are them drinking their own Kool-aid. Like, what they’ve done to the HHS is objectively detrimental to the ultra-wealthy old guys too. There’s some arguments to be had around tariffs, but implementing them Iike this is more on the kool-aid side.
This gold from wallstreetbets:
Soooo is the tariffs charged to the United States really a ratio of the trade imbalance?? For example Vietnam imported roughly 14.6 billion in goods from the United States, and we imported around 146 billion, so thus they have decided tariffs are 90% to the United States…thus we are putting a tariff on them of half of that…which means we are literally tariffing the goods we either a)need more or b) get more efficiently at a higher rate? That may be the absolute dumbest way to create a tariff policy I could imagine if that is the case…which it looks to be.
https://old.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/1jpzhje/tariff_chart_released/ml476s7/
They’ll try to spin it in tomorrows finance news, so it may be sharp but not as sharp as it should be.
Most headlines I see are going with 10%, which is a big understatement.
It’s because they’re run by billionaires. Even liberal, big outlets harp on cultural issues to redirect focus.
Bingo.
It’s true in many roundabout ways, but the math adds up to “break for billionaires.”
Like, it’s full of nepotism and revenge, too. The Taiwan tax sucks. And take the discrete tax on automobiles and auto parts: I’ll give you one guess on who that benefits.
The tiny scale artists still have to buy supplies. And eat, and pay rent.
Don’t forget, this is a regressive tax, and small craft workers tend to be poor.
Their prices will go up as much. It may even be worse for them, in aggregate, even if selling more of their stuff.
Probably fucking subsidized instead, though I didn’t see specifics about fossil fuels
I’m not sure that’s any better, as traders and news have a whole night to digest it now. It might’ve seemed less bad with just an hour (before the next controversy consumes the cycle).
True! Models not trained on a specific language are generally bad at that language.
However, there are some exceptions, like a Japanese tune of Qwen 32B which dramatically enhances it Japanese, but the training has to be pretty extensive.
And even that aside… the effect is still there. The point it to illustrate that LLMs are sort of “language independent” internally, like you said.
It’s a metaphor.
They’re translating the input tokens to intent in the model’s middle layers, which is a bit more precise.
I use local instances of Aya 32B (and sometimes Deepseek, Qwen, LG Exaone, Japanese finetunes, others depending on the language) to translate stuff, and it is quite different than Google Translate or any machine translation you find online. They get the “meaning” of text instead of transcribing it robotically like Google, and are actually pretty loose with interpretation.
It has soul… sometimes too much. That’s the problem: It’s great for personal use where it can ocassionally be wrong or flowery, but not good enough for publishing and selling, as the reader isn’t necessarily cognisant of errors.
In other words, AI translation should be a tool the reader understands how to use, not something to save greedy publishers a buck.
EDIT: Also, if you train an LLM for some job/concept in pure Chinese, a surprising amount of that new ability will work in English, as if the LLM abstracts language internally. Hence they really (sorta) do a “meaning” translation rather than a strict definitional one… Even when they shouldn’t.
Another thing you can do is translate with one local LLM, then load another for a reflection/correction check. This is another point for “open” and local inference, as corporate AI goes for cheapness, and generally tries to restrict you from competitors.
Many (American) folks of mine, even more conservative ones, tend to tune out familiar news sources because they’re so bad. Others are really glued to Facebook or whatever their feed of choice is.
TBH I think America (on average) just lives in a stronger information dystopia than Europe. People here don’t connect social security cuts to them, or even know about Trump’s/Musk’s statements on it.
Morale of the story… please ban Facebook, X, really most engagement-driven social media as fast as you can. Or risk turning into… us.
It’s supposed to be immersive, I think, so as not to force a voice that doesn’t match the roleplaying in your head.
I’m with you, though, I’d much prefer VA.
It’s a feature.
Probably not going to happen in the house. The 4 Senate Republicans that voted that way are known breakaways/Trump haters:
https://www.axios.com/2025/04/02/senate-repeal-trump-tariffs-canada