geremiiah

No, these are two very different objectives.

AfD also self-censors. They frame the whole anti-immigration debate as anti-Muslim/asylumseeker, but if you read between the lines they are making arguements that apply to pretty much everyone who isn't German.

So they frame the anti-immigrant debate as if they are fighting to kick out the Syrian asylum seeker who hasn't worked a day since he arrived in 2015. But in truth, they are basically saying, "we don't want too many foreigners, especially ones that don't look German". This applies to pretty much all the legal immigrants in Germany.

Presumably they only have empirical results and if so, wouldn't you need to train multiple successive models to even test such a hypothesis? Even then, it's not like an inductive proof. An improvement in one generation does not imply an improvement in the next (unless you define improvement to mean exactly that).

The problem with physics and chemistry is that you need simulations and those are often in themselves compute hungry. So the iteration loop will be slower.

Why does the article title imply that VW is going to build weapons but the second paragraph then clarifies that the plant will be sold?

Isn't that purposefully misleading?

In a world where sedans have been replaced by SUVs, I don't see how the market would react positively to this. But then again, Lime scooters are paradoxically also a thing. I guess maybe it's a matter of marketing?

Energy markets are also much easier to quantify, thus harder to build a hype machine around.

Hmm, I think you provide a compelling narrative. However I'm not very convinced.

I think AI is a good example. EU wide there are plenty of public HPC centers and in 2020 we had (relative to the world) plenty of compute. In other words, we had the tech, we had the compute, and we had the know how. And yet we don't really have a competitive AI scene in Europe. There were some very small projects launched to try to train LLMs. All of them were no more than learning exercises.

How will QC be different?

True, but what they do is they invest in fundamental research and then expect magic to happen and that research to lead to economic growth. Unfortunately the wizards that cast the spells live in the US, not Europe.

Because lots of senior researchers who call the shots are somehow invested in QC.

EU also recently introduced a 3 euro fee on all packages from China. Maybe well intentioned but it puts a huge markup, when a thinker wants to buy a very specific 0.05 euro spring from AliExpress or something along those lines.

It's an interesting topic, but the article is completely AI generated, which isn't surprising considering the startup, but still, if you don't even go over the output what's the point?

I'm usually a fan of pg, but this post is ignorant of modern AI technologies. Building an LLM from scratch is both a trivial and a useless exercise. There's probably in the range of 5000 github repos doing exactly that. What makes LLMs work is scale, and what makes engineering and training LLMs hard is also scale. And scale is not something you can achieve in your garage.

If the goal is to understand LLMs deeply, one would be better served by either joining one of the big AI companies or doing a PhD. And to be honest, I think this journey should have been started 5 years ago, because right now there's too much competition.