SiempreViernes

If they would be profitable without further spending on R&D they would stop spending, but as you say they are in an R&D race so they can't stop and thus the hypothetical is irrelevant.

It was a joke based on the historical fact that students frequently trigger violent uprisings...

And then decided to not ask the PHP foundation about it?

> That is a fundamental problem that you will not solve by asking youger folks, who are actually affected and have all reason to agree and comply, to make a change.

Younger folks tend to be more enthusiastic about "making a change" by direct action means, so you shouldn't count them out!

No, all CO2 emission must stop so everybody is gotta put on work anyway.

Also, if what you had in mind with "focusing on" is some sort of military solution, you are listing the wrong thing; what you need is a list of top fossil fuel exporters which looks different from the "top emitters" list.

This ignores the big wheezing elephant in the room: climate action is fighting extremely entrenched and monied interests that are betting on dying before the bill for their action comes due and are ready to lie on almost unimaginable scale.

Saying it is simply a "branding failure" is about as accurate as saying "planning failure" is why around 80% of Ukrainians lost power in 2024.

The issue being objected to is that Amazon serving DeepSeek apparently is not fine, despite having exactly the same security mechanism (Bezos goes to jail).

Closed models are used to pick military targets, which seems pretty trusty to me. There was also that time where every US government employee had to send a self-written review of their work to be consumed by a very closed source model, and that too was fine. It also seems likely basically all employment data in the US federal government has been fed into a closed source model, and again this was fine according to the government.

So it seems like there is little self-hosted open weight models cannot be used for.

You check your predicted outcomes against observed outcomes. It sounds like you claim there aren't any observable outcomes of your model, which is why I again suggest you turn to astrologers who knows how to handle this case.

Sadly, these days the warmongers are having real boom times, which ironically means a tramsfer of power to people who benefit from wars becoming more frequent in the name of making us more safe.

I think it's fair to skip the video and go directly to the comments when it has a ragebait title, if Grant was mainly seeking serious discussion he'd use a serious title.

Probabilistic Monte Carlo simulations are a way to check your guesses, if you claim you can't even guess at how things work you should consult a professional astrologer.

Even if this was overly long and mostly things I've seen before, I'm just very thankful that it wasn't yet another claude piece.

Stanton should say something about how long he's practised to write exactly like a mainstream LLM, surely his effort in resisting the urge to edit this page for length must have been heroic: it is worth a mention.