alex-moon

Ahh AoK is such an amazing game! I kind of want to download it now. I was never very good at it as a kid, spent _way_ too much time building my own campaigns with triggers (this was in the early days before I had discovered programming languages) - obviously no-one ever actually played these.

Really interesting to notice a steadily increasing proliferation of anti-open weights and anti-non-US model rhetoric in the HN comments. Yesterday I saw a comment on another thread claiming a FOSS agentic SWE provider "shill cheap and shitty models", the kind of thing I'd expect from an Anthropic/OpenAI astroturfing campaign or a person with some kind of crippling substance abuse issues doing severe and ongoing brain damage - not really clear which it is but I can't readily imagine a more reasonable third alternative.

I have.

Strictly speaking this is in fact correct and is part of the drive for sovereign AI more broadly including Mistral.

This is an excellent write-up and has successfully changed my opinion on something I think will prove critical in the near future: I always laughed at humanoid robots, assuming they were being built for "comfort" reasons. I now realise this is almost certainly the most reliable way to solve the general robot problem - not just for the reasons the OP lays out, but because the whole world is already built for human-shaped agents anyway.

"You could have invented..."

Oh you know there is gonna be maths in this one. (clicks link)

"Here are the terms we will use throughout: a 'memory store' is a function f..."

Yes. Ha ha! Yes!

Really disappointing to see this engagement bait on HN. It's all over Reddit now, so I guess it was only a matter of time, but still. I've flagged this and am hoping mods act quickly to stamp this out before it becomes widespread here as well.

I think because we're all just using it thinking we have found the "model for me" and never mentioning it to anyone because what would we say? It's good. It's a bit like the Logitech MX Master, as more and more people assumed they had found the ideal mouse for their purposes, it quietly became the professional standard through sheer adoption.

This is true of all technology. What is special about AI?

> we can fairly say that Hinton was wrong because his prediction did not reflect what a radiologist actually does: had Hinton bothered to ask the question, he would have learned that practitioners do much more than interpret diagnostic images.

This has been the crux, for me, of arguments I have had with non-technical people about why, as a software engineer, I am intensely relaxed about AI "taking human jobs". Recently Ford quietly started re-recruiting engineers after they discovered the hard way that their engineers had been doing more than they thought they had, and I sent articles about it to friends I had previously been discussing the matter with. It is still mind-blowing to me that a business historically famous for automating manual labour can have made this mistake, i.e. of literally not knowing what their staff actually do.

Humans aren't machines, who would have guessed? But, perhaps more importantly, machines aren't humans, and the adherence of a lot of domain experts (that should know better) to fairy tale fantasies about the tech they are literally building genuinely makes me wonder if the whole field has just gotten dumber in the 21st century.

It's said on every one of these but it bears repeating: existing cybercrime legislation already covers this - "rogue agent AI associated with OpenAI attempted to hack xyz" = OpenAI attempted to hack xyz.