any_throw777

So on point. I rewatched Spielberg's AI from 2001 yesterday. All the visual effects were solid, but it wasn't anything about the scale or the beauty of the scenes that makes that movie touching.

It's the universal themes of love, longing, caring. That's what's missing in today's slopfest sequelities of modern movie making.

I hope new tech lowers the cost of production so much it allows those with taste, vision and care to topple the mess of modern 'storytelling'. We are getting the technology, let's hope we can have the imagination.

It's worse than that.

I asked ChatGPT which has a memory model. It's answer about this question was quite a lot more sharp. "I'm not sure we can justify continue human existence." Not quite arguing for human extinction, but not going out to support us either.

I asked a local model. It answered, humans are succeptible to "collective delusion", an inflated sense of self, and calling out that what we call progress is often a redistribution of impacts.

So, there's something deeply flawed about this article. Notice also they don't give the detailed prompts.

What's irritating is not just the lack of transparency, then the broad claims, but it's the manner it keeps presenting the essential theme of "use the model like a fool, get foolish answers", which reinforces the same human delusion and self-centeredness my local model is pointing out.

It's also confusing the types of heavy, heavy reinforcement that online companies have in altering behaviors of these models with the fact that they outtput the same.

News flash. Most HR departments will spew the same "we value our employees" and from that POV, they don't show much intelligence either, until you understand the PR, HR and RL go hand in hand for these multi trillion valuations.

Agreed. I was in France recently, and it's hard to overstate how much raw disagreement there is between the people there. You think left vs right is bad in the US, you haven't tried 4 or 5 different microshifted pov on either side, all completely in opposition with anything but their own candidate.

People there talk about needing a new constitution. Elections won't fix France, and neither will economic policy. The problem is fragmentation.

Just watch tomorrow.

you should have a preview of what it sounds like on the page.

if there's a use case for re/decompiling, it's this one. with at least one strong alternative implementation, there would be less incentive on the attacking side to go all out on either PHP implementation.

reminds me of the guy that dials in to the mullah, asking "hey, I fell on plate of shwarma and ate it, what should I do now?"

some people are just lacking coordination

I find this author's line of argumentation tenuous as best. I don't recall the memo that forced the West, and the US specifically, to rush along in a AI-first, or really, AI-only strategy.

I also recall clearly when OpenAI stopped publishing open models, or the safety concerned Anthropic was arguing they need regulations to smother competition from all sides.

Neither have we collectively even begun to assess the true economic cost of dashing to build trillions of data centers, in either first or second order effects.

One thing that does seem clear is that the benefits of AI, as the US practices them, seem, as always to be intended to be concentrated in the hands of the few.

But all these points are about the social context. To return to the substance; how did China induce a capitalistic psychosis of profit chasing in our society? Is it a long malaise of inequality that meant the only path of ascension for smart capable individual was software development, a path that VCs were dreaming of removing to make capital more efficient for themselves? The same VC's that now want to cry they no longer have the lead over open weight models, that their investments and dreams of exclusive access are now defunct?

I don't dream of Chinese overlords, but neither am I blind to the US version. I rarely feel revulsion of this level, except when coming across a hypocritical, vacuous piece that demands, somehow, that we should do something about the fact that other people and societies might, for some reason, not want to follow in spending untold trillions into this technology. And if releasing an open model is all it took to collapse the US economic model, maybe that's the sign that it was on it's last legs.

I'm thinking reverse gene drive? Keep the animals and destroy the pests. Also let's do that for screw worms.

I hate to say it depends, but, it depends.

If you have local hardware (16-24 gb of video card), you should be able to use a number of different ml approaches, including LLMs. You could also try a forest classifier, or other approaches, but without specific about your data, it might be a little challenging to rec one.

I would try OpenAI or Anthropic. You should be able to fit all your categories in a prompt, and then ask the specific item. Something like >>

You are a classifer agent. Here is a list of categories and subcategory.

-item 1 -item 2 -... -item 776

The details of the channel are x, and here are a few descriptions.

--- The above could work if you can fit all the categories and description in one prompt. Both OpenAI and claude are pretty large.

The downside of this approach is that it's very hard to predict the classification with any reliability.

The upside is that it's fast and very likely to fit your budget. GL

I'm also much smarter than average, and it used to bother me.

I agree with your call to patience. In some way, we can see intelligence, and general wisdom as two axis.

Beyond patience, consider working on your compassion. You could try meditation, walks and any number of strategies, but foremost, you need to consider all those around us as worthwhile, regardless of their skills, intelligence, wisdom or anything else.

It is up to you to see beyond the superficial, and work your gifts for the benefit of those around you. If you mix your intelligence with compassion, you should be able to make others come to your view.