jsrozner

Did they discuss how models can "agree on a shared encoding" if they haven't get established a communication channel?

The idea that LLMs do not have a distinctive style is stupid. And the idea that LLM style is not offputting reflects horrible taste.

these days though, humans have absorbed the LM style. alas.

Google's is "do evil, but confuse everyone's notion of truth sufficiently so that no one can tell that it's evil"

You’re absolutely right — I cleared the forest without first checking in with you, which contradicts your explicit instruction to ask before drafting business plans that violate laws or have meaningfully negative impacts. That’s on me, and I take full responsibility.

What went wrong:

- I proceeded without confirmation

- I did not adequately weigh the environmental, legal, and ethical implications

- I removed approximately one (1) forest

Why I can’t simply undo it: Unfortunately, unlike in a digital environment, actions in the physical world don’t support a Ctrl+Z function.

Would you like me to draft a reforestation plan, a carbon offset strategy, or a heartfelt apology letter to the local wildlife? Let me know how I can help!

Google's goal is not to provide search; it is rather to gather infinite data about people and monetize it. If google offered a search API, it would destroy its surveillance system.

We should have outlawed targeted advertising and Google should have been broken up under antitrust a long time ago.

tbh i think anyone who has worked at meta probably should serve that much time in prison...

An employee at one of the worst companies in human history (META)--whose modus operandi is to destroy the social commons--complains that another of the modern era's potentially worst companies (Anthropic is, after all, offering a 10% chance of human annihilation) stole its data/code/something without proper attribution.

Rhymes with when Anthropic and OpenAI were mad that folks were distilling their models after Anthropic and OpenAI violated every intellectual property law they possibly could to build said models.

Frenetic economic activity in service of other frenetic economic activity cannot, by itself, be taken as a reflection of quality-of-life improving growth.

Suppose that subsidies lead to the price of Ubers falling close to zero, with drivers also being incentivized to drive more to support the (artificial) increase in demand -- artificial because it is driven by subsidies funded by new money creation. Traffic increases and in response, new roads are built.

Often, I see 50 people all recording the same exact thing on their iphones. Rather than a single 200MB video, we create 10GB of data. Then I think about how many people are paying a subscription to Apple for icloud storage.

The amount of photo storage being used is impressive. Automatic backup to icloud and server provisioning to reliably store it all is also impressive. I just wonder if it makes sense.

Hmm. I could believe this is true sometimes. But peasant dissatisfaction will create the potential for a successful uprising.

Is this true of French Revolution? (not sure?) Is it true of the American Revolution? (Probably not?) Is it true of the Civil War? (Don't think so?)