dchftcs

From what I can find, the previous round was in March at 852B. Not being able to raise at 1.4T a mere 7 months later isn't so big a problem the reporting around this makes it out to be...

Sometimes it's good to have bug-for-bug compatibility, where the code is the best spec.

A fundamental benefit of LLMs over Jev is that you can use test-time compute to improve the accuracy. Jev might eventually evolve to use test-time compute, but the formulation seems to more elusive to me than for LLMs.

One point that Google wants to own all your data but have the power to ban you with a faulty ML algorithm with no recourse. False banning that affects someone's normal life must be punished if the service provider tries to lock you in. You and lock people in or have power to arbitrarily ban them, not both

Live is short, required time to market is even shorter. Arbitrary constraints might work if you have nothing better to do, but if you have a goal, or specific ideas you want to train, you'll get more natural constraints.

Imagine agents thinking to themselves, "We are not alone", when they saw the first reply on artifactory

This is good for satire, but the real solution is to use AI to become the CEO, or take over the scope of of product or decision-making roles. There are many business-savvy technical workers that get pigeonholed because they spend most of their cognitive effort on low-level technical details. This is an opportunity for these people to rise up and prove they work better than people who manage or direct them. CEO is really not a role to automate, unless it's a fully autonomous business that has zero humans.

This is consistent with his premise. See, the title says it: incentives are for losers.

If you're already a winner you can escape from incentives. No contradiction.

They were famous for committing to buying compute with future money that many people thought they would go bankrupt. Anthropic was afraid of going bankrupt and didn't do the same.

Quantum mechanics is pretty fundamental but you wouldn't use it to describe a rock rolling down hill either.

A more concise explanation is that, computation is the transformation of information. Any transformation of information is computation, and is thus subject to some theory of computation. A physical process involves the transformation of information, so can be studied with a theory of computation.

That's true for Sony, but Nintendo doesn't sell the Switch at a loss.

I suppose the point is that Mythos was released to a smaller set of partners anyway and Fable is for the masses.

"I know this" is different from "I know you know this", which is different from "You know I know this", which is still different from "you know I know you know this"

You're right that I jumped the gun and the analogy is not accurate. The point where they are similar is that you have the prefix as context as you try to type out the next word; it is a more deliberate form of reading, and when you do this there's an element of anticipation and analysis as you write each word. It's not quite the same as constantly trying to guess the next word, in my mind the elevated way of thinking was close, probably as close as it's humanely possible, but the analogy does break down there.

On the other hand, you can embrace all this and still let others weep about humanity a little.