Bjorkbat

This is a reflection of a complaint I frequently make about so called "world models". It's more accurate to call them video game models. They don't simulate the world, they simulate video games. For that reason a common issue with them is that the physics are video game physics rather than real world physics.

I know people hate it when I draw a comparison between crypto/NFTs and AI since the latter has some utility, but it really is crazy just how similar the vibes are, and you can see this in this recent fad of people trying to clone existing software with AI.

In case anyone has a fuzzy memory, back during peak NFT hype grifters would take art made by other artists and attempt to tokenize it as NFTs without the consent of the original artist, or otherwise possibly copy said artist's work and make a collection of it.

It was disgusting and parasitic then and it's disgusting and parasitic now.

I was about to say, one take I've heard is that the party ideology considers profit a kind of "rent" in a derogatory way, and consequently seeks to undermine the ability of western companies to collect large profit margins

Okay, look, at this point this really should be a company-ending incident. Or, I should say, incidents. I was fine the first time I heard of some rogue hacking accident, but now I've lost count of how many times OpenAI has lost control of its AI.

They may be some of the smartest people in the industry but they're clearly too incompetent and/or negligent to be allowed to develop more intelligent AI. This is ridiculous.

Huh, person who contributed this to Atlas Obscura has an interesting username.

Let's do some roleplay. You're an employee at OpenAI evaluating a model in a sandbox and you and your colleagues are discussing the fact that while the sandbox doesn't allow for internet access, it actually kind of does allow for internet access in that it allows models to download whatever software packages they need through a package manager that OpenAI hosts internally. So to be clear, OpenAI hosts the package manager, but the software packages themselves are still out there, on the internet.

Do you think that this package manager could potentially be a problem? Do you think it might be worthwhile to host the software packages themselves on an internal, sandboxed network, just to be extra certain? Or would you dismiss this as a needless precaution?

All the more reason then to call their bluff. "Oooh we created a genie and it's almost out of the box". Cool, you've hyped the IPO, but also you have to plead your case before Congress as to why the company should continue to operate given its failure to prevent AI-related accidents from occurring.

When I hear about incidents like these my first reaction is that the people responsible for developing frontier AI are too incompetent and/or negligent to (safely) develop AGI / superintelligence.

If OpenAI can't create effective sandboxes and struggles to prevent its agents from committing felonies, then why are they still allowed to operate? Why are the employees who are responsible for these lapses in AI security still employed?

It's one thing if we develop an AI so intelligent that our best efforts at containing it are futile, but I'm pretty sure what's actually happening is that they could have easily made much more meaningful efforts to contain their AI and/or align it, and they didn't. I think this is a case of negligence and incompetence when it comes to safety and security, and we've entrusted these incompetent and negligent people with developing frontier AI.

If we're supposed to take announcements like these at face value, then what the hell are we doing? We wouldn't trust a bunch of incompetent and negligent engineers to build bridges or nuclear power plants or planes (well...not so sure about that last one), so why are we letting people who are demonstrably negligent and incompetent when it comes to safety and security build the thing they assure us could cause massive damage if not properly controlled/aligned?

EDIT: sorry guys, wrote this up pretty quickly, at least you know from my typos that I actually wrote this.

The most straightforward answer is that despite efforts to design a benchmark that, in theory, is supposed to measure generalizable intelligence, performance on ARC-AGI-3 can't be reliably correlated to performance anywhere else. I kind of lost faith in it after o1 or o3, I can't remember which, absolutely crushed ARC-AGI-1.

And, you know, maybe also some funny business. I think it's good to be a little suspicious of a model that happens to shoot upwards in performance on a specific benchmark while also kind of keeping up with the pack on a bunch of other benchmarks.

For my needs, sure. One caveat is that if I’m doing a longer trip I might save power by turning it off when the ground is flat/downhill

Arguably the "social coding" angle is the reason why Tangled is the only actual alternative to GitHub. Otherwise there's actually plenty of other alternatives to GitHub, but none of them have GitHub's punchcard, which I'm ashamed to admit is the primary draw for me.

I actually bought one of these and love it. My road bike is indistinguishable from any other normal road bike with the exception of it being much easier to get around now.

From experience I can say that it seems like a lot more common sense to simply replace the front wheel of your bike with a wheel containing an electric motor, rather than attaching whatever Asus is selling to your bike.

I was about to post a snarky comment along the lines of "Sierra? The publishers of Homeworld and Homeworld 2?"