encyclopedism

If revenue continues to increase like this we can expect Anthropic to make up 110% of the world's GDP very very soon (Rubs hand together).

I've commented elsewhere about this but so many are flippant towards your feelings and it's quite sad.

Comments such as "now that economically 'traditional coding' no longer works" get over it. Or a recent one "get over your anthropocentric view of intelligence, AI is here now".

These views (and many more besides) are short sighted, I do think anthropocentrically. The economy is a proxy for the lives of real people, the economy matters only because it deals with real people. People who feel, have agency, who live and die.

Two super AI's talking to each other maybe the most intelligent things in the universe but they don't matter.

Humans matter, human lives matter, human feelings matter.

> AIs are not conscious.

This is a completely reasonable and intuitive conclusion. The burden of proof rests on proving AI's are indeed conscious, the default is that they aren't.

Like AI/LLMS my desktop calculator is also not conscious, even as it is far better than me at computation.

An LLM is an algorithm. You can obtain the same result as a SOTA LLM via pen and paper it will take a lot of long laborious effort.

I really do find it puzzling so many on HN are convinced LLM's reason or think and continue to entertain this line of reasoning. At the same time also somehow knowing what precisely the brain/mind does and constantly using CS language to provide correspondences where there are none.

The simplest example being that LLM's somehow function in a similar fashion to human brains. They categorically do not. I do not have most all of human literary output in my head and yet I can coherently write this sentence.

I am surprised so many in the HN community have so quickly taken to assuming as fact that LLM's think or reason. Even anthropomorphising LLM's to this end.

> but doesn't it also make sense for the government to create the regulations that will make this easier to do in a trustless way?

That's a premise, which is the point. Many (I) think the government should NOT enact regulations. For example regulatory capture to reducing competition is one reason it may not be a good idea to do what is being asked.

He doesn't need anyones permission to do so, go ahead no one is stopping you! If you feel so strongly about it, lead by example. Perhaps others will follow, maybe even China. Regardless, backup your sentiment with actions.

Also everyone, collectively, stop thinking about neural networks too 'hard'. Whilst you're at it stop doing maths too!

Exactly

He doesn't need anyones permission to do so, go ahead no one is stopping you! If you feel so strongly about it, lead by example. Perhaps others will follow, maybe even China. Regardless backup your sentiment with actions!

Everyone, collectively, stop thinking about neural networks too 'hard'. Whilst you're at it stop doing maths too!