evdubs

> I have no doubt they have some reserves now, but do they have $182 billiom USD, really?

This is literally what the attestations and audits are for. BDO and KPMG both have issued opinions saying yes, they do have all the money they claim to have.

If you believe pangram is a good AI text detector, it scores the first 2000 words of the article as 100% human written.

I get the same results as hightrix from the US.

You're not going to lose your job because you shared your AI setup / tools with your colleagues. You're going to lose your job because management over-hired and is being pressured by shareholders to reduce employee salary expenses. It won't matter what hard problem solving moat you think you have if management is forced to have layoffs and you're in an unlucky situation. If you're worried about job security, you should consider joining a union and not be fixated on knowledge sharing.

> There is no 'off' button when you don't know where the AI is.

You mean the AI that is hundreds if not thousands of gigabytes in size and requires incredibly expensive chips to run at reasonable rates? We know where that is. Frontier models are not going to leap to an unsecure raspberry pi, no matter how much you have convinced yourself about the inevitability.

> Going back to my original point, the intent you give AI is no different than the intent imprinted on a child by their parents, schools, and society.

Of course it is different. I wish I could turn off children as easily as I can turn off an agent. I could have slept better and had a better mood.

> You're blinking cursor is new born baby, but be careful because it grows up really fast

It's not a baby, just a piece of software. It generates a bunch of slop that is most useful when constrained with an output fact checker like a compiler.

> It can even turn against you.

Oh no! The next tokens from its output told me it didn't want to satisfy my request! Who cares?

Keep the AI going with what intent? You open up Claude Code and it starts developing zero day exploits and hacks into systems by just looking at a blinking cursor?

Sit down with a person and do nothing. What does the person do? Do they get up and leave?

Sit down at an AI prompt and do nothing. What does the AI do? Does it get up and leave?

> A billion people are going to die because you don't understand what is bad.

Lol. Lmfao, even.

I care about LLM service provider threat intelligence reports as much as I care about Google Search threat intelligence reports; which is to say, I don't care at all about it. Of course criminals use computers. They have been since personal computers became a thing. Of course using automation helps them amplify their criminal activities. Criminals using LLMs does not make the LLM situation bad. OpenAI and Anthropic using agents to do bad things just to be more dramatic about the situation and scare people is bad.

> Do you think the current state of affairs is GOOD?

Chinese labs releasing open weights models is good.

All of these independent harnesses and model router services are good.

The pricing of memory and accelerators sucks at the moment but hopefully we will see cool local inference computing if memory and accelerator prices normalize.

OpenAI scooping the Navier Stokes problem from researchers already using OpenAI is bad. People conflating OpenAI's team of researchers and extraordinary computing resources as being equivalent to "ChatGPT, solve the Navier Stokes problem" is silly.

OpenAI and Anthropic coming up with non sense tests and letting their agents hack services is ridiculous and they should be charged with computer fraud and abuse crimes.

I think a lot of it is interesting and the bad stuff seems squarely in the domain of OpenAI and Anthropic.