bubaumba

it may be even cheaper to use big models through API. Claude, GPT, whatever. Rental is efficient only for big butches, while API is priced per call/size and is cheap for small models.

It's a trick. If you donate something to charity you can write it off the taxes. After IPOs most new billionaires did it, including Zuk. It's enough to just promise it publicly. There is no time limit, it can take years to 'donate', but writing off is immediate. To optimize it even further they create their own dummy charities full of friends and relatives.

Simple tax optimization. Like new billionaires promising to significant donations. a) they don't have to donate. b) they can immediately slash those promised donations from taxes.

3. Quick lookup into internal documents. Almost any company needs it. Navigating file-system like hierarchy is slow and limited. That was old way.

4. Quick lookup into the code to find relevant parts even when the wording in comments is different.

This is cool, but how about local semantic search through tens of thousands articles and books. Sure I'm not the first, there should be some tools already.

> I don't think I see them as a win

Unavoidable, probably

> but they're easily dealt with. AI will need analysts at the latter stage to evaluate the outputs but that will be a relatively short-lived problem

That solves only to some degree. Hallucinations may happen at this stage too. Then either correct answer can get rejected or false pass through.

> it will just have much better precision than us.

and much faster with the right hardware. And that's enough if AI can do in seconds what humans takes years. With o3 the price is only the limit, looks like.

After collision drone should shut itself down and drop like a rock. Looks like it wasn't the case here. And there should be nobody on the ground below, of course. Flying over that lake would be safe

> home made explosive

With this a lot of damage can be done even without drone. As for weaponized it's not a future, it's a reality in Ukraine for years now. Defense against them is difficult to impossible. A bodyguard who can sacrifice himself may sometimes work.

Nothing to worry about. They are dead end only if we find something better. Till then they here to stay. And likely even after they will be used.

They are not mutually exclusive. Likely we'll get more clear separation of architecture and underlying technology. In this case agents (i.e. architecture) can use different technologies or mix of them. Including 'AI' and algorithms. The trick is to make them work together.

> AGI is special. Because one day AI can start improving itself autonomously

AGI can be sub-human, right? That's probably how it will start. The question will be is it already AGI or not yet, i.e. where to set the boundary. So, at first that will be humans improving AGI, but then... I'm afraid it can get so much better that humans will be literally like macaques in comparison.

> if the underlying LLMs dont get any better, there is no reason to expect the system built out of them to get any better.

Actually o1, o3 are doing exactly this, and very well. I.e. explicitly: by proper orchestration the same LLM can do much better job. There is a price, but...

> you would expect to be able to build agentic systems out of much smaller LLMs

Good point, it should be possible to do it on a high-end pc or even embedded.