mrguyorama

And for an identical reason.

As long as there is money to be made by being the first thing pushed to a consumer's eyes when they want information, search is an adversarial market, doomed to cat and mouse games and failure states.

The early days of PageRank were entirely anomalous because nobody was poisoning the well they were using yet. The second they made doing so financially incentivized, that situation went away and Pagerank and all algorithms like it were doomed to struggle.

I genuinely respect the process of the courts, even in our currently IMO messed up justice system, but I will protest that courts get things wrong plenty often, which is why we built a tiered system.

Courts once said a black man can't be a citizen.

I don't know what else to tell you, but yes a world where a company is free to single handedly buy all compute and then rent it out to you for insane prices is quite literally a free market.

If you do anything to prevent that, that would be a less free market. By definition.

Free markets have nothing to do with a market having healthy competition and sane behavior. Free markets in fact reward you with doing absurd things that fuck with prices to make your bag.

It is entirely the point of the free market that Micron can decide that selling all memory to only Anthropic is a better distribution of their resources and you can go pound sand if you can't find any memory any more.

So yes, monopolizing all silicon in the world and then demanding you pay them for using it is literally a free market.

Free markets trend torwards monopolies and other market failures without intervention excepting very specific markets that have genuinely mostly fungible products that are easy to sell, which we call commodities, and even those can in fact become failed markets like what once happened with onions.

If you think this can't be a free market because it's in a bad place for you personally, you don't understand market theory.

Free markets are also free to become "distorted" as you say.

You shouldn't have to believe, because the various poor white guys who died for the south wrote plenty about how their driving motivation was that a black guy having the same social status as them was worse than death.

They literally wanted to kill northerners for daring to make them equal to black people.

Still do.

NK is literally the primary victor of Crypto as an ecosystem. They've never had an easier time funding their economy.

The previous strategy North Korea used before Crypto was to make the best quality counterfeit US dollars ever made. That got somewhat countered. So North Korea was actually going to be in a bad place funding wise. Thank goodness everyone gave them trivial access to free money through crypto!

Thanks to Crypto and the Ukraine war, North Korea is doing really well for itself. Which, to be clear, means nuclear tipped ICBMs

No, your understanding isn't correct. The vast majority of "average" people cannot stop working and cannot survive off their income.

The cost of somewhere to live has gone up so much that even people like me, with an absurd amount of cash in the bank account, can't leave work and try to survive because it would be wiped out by 3 years of rent.

How many average laborers in a country with fully socialized medicine can afford a decade of rent off their current savings? How many could do that even if they magically found a way to cut other expenses in half?

I could eliminate my electric bill, my internet bill, my grocery bill, all my bills other than rent, and the money saved per year would pay for an extra month or so of rent. That is the entire problem. No amount of frugality can paper over this systemic problem.

When my mother raised us in poverty, it was necessary to play games with utilities, which ones you cancelled which months, to make ends meet. This was actually worth doing, because skipping the $20 cable payment one month was about 1/10th of the monthly house payment. A year of skipping cable could pay for a month of rent. If I skipped a year of much more expensive cable internet, I could not use that to pay even a single month of rent. There's a lot of dumb money being spent, with my personal pet peeve being cell phones, but if a person "doesn't need" the newest iPhone and went without to be frugal, often they haven't even gotten back a single month's rent. What the fuck is the point of living in serious poverty just so that you can extend your rent runway by less than 10%?

The only people in current society who can actually afford to survive off the wealth they have accumulated are called capital owners and you will find that indeed, they are rarely doing things they don't "want" to do, and no, the time they spend really shouldn't be considered "work" since they sign their own paychecks most of the time.

Running a business is work, but if I get to decide what my business does, I don't get to then insist that my side hobbies that I've started doing under the name of my business are also work.

>I do wonder what the US game plan is here long term.

Our government is run by 80 year olds and their 80 year old rich as fuck friends.

The long term plan is "Be Dead, don't care about anything"

This is a huge reason why you need diversity in any system, here we need diversity of ages, so that young people who have a high investment in a far future can counterbalance old people who have high investment in the now.

If you want long term visions, you have to reward eschewing quick wins, and we openly declared that to not be policy as of the 80s and Reagan.

Seeing as the keep "discovering" things that are well known in the security research community, this is security research in the same way that a high school class is physics research.

Cache based side channels were in vogue over a decade ago. It was a point of contention back when people were first switching to AWS because "How can I be sure an attacker running on the same box as my service can't affect me?" is a big question that AWS needed to answer.

"Extract secrets from someone else's running VM" is a well trodden cybersecurity path because AWS wants to be able to promise to you that running your very important workload in the same physical box as literal random script kiddies won't somehow screw you over.

People are saying correct things (The bottleneck is downstream at phase 3 trials, labwork is slow) without seemingly recognizing what those things actually mean or imply about any LLM assistance.

The reason that Phase 3 trials are any sort of bottleneck instead of just checking boxes is that drugs that make it to that point are still extremely likely to fail and not be productized. The phase 3 trial is hard, expensive, and slow because it's the only strong filter we have! After phase 3 trials is the only point at which you become confident that this chemical doesn't do crazy unknown things to humans.

This is because the previous trials are not sufficient enough and high fidelity enough analogues of real human biology to be able to prevent that outcome!

Literal living human cells in a petri dish are not sufficient to tell you if a drug will work or not because the entire human system is extremely chaotic and interconnected. Even animals "99%" similar to humans are not similar enough to prevent unpredicted catastrophic outcomes in that full blown human trial.

We do not have enough knowledge anywhere about any of this for an LLM to be useful at all, because we have simply never collected the data necessary to be able to predict outcomes of novel interactions in the full scale system.

We haven't quantified the human system nearly enough.

You want to fix this? Don't go buy tokens, spend $2 trillion on grad bioscience students quantifying literally every protein and gene and structure and behavior and interaction in the human body. You literally have to brute force this problem.

You can't use "simulators" because there's no data for the sim to be evaluated and verified against in the first place. Our knowledge is too sparse.

LLMs cannot magic new information from limited data. Even magic "Superintelligent" AI wouldn't be able to fix fundamental deficiencies in what we know about the human body. There's this extremely silly and weird belief that it will be able to figure everything out "from first principles" and it's driving me up a wall.

Atom level simulations of anything in our reality are computationally infeasible at scales larger than "One cell", and you should expect that to not change since there's not expected to be a magic machine that can somehow undo computational complexity. Well, there is, in that our reality is that machine, but it's not very amenable to isolation for experimentation.

Fundamentally, there seems to be a serious fault among "AI" boosters of deeply believing the "Great man" theory of reality, that everything just needs a magically "smart" enough person to solve, as if someone clever enough could somehow trick physics itself. It's extremely ignorant of reality. There are problems in the current world that no amount of "intelligence" can solve, because the problem is not constrained by reasoning ability in the first place. A lot of bioscience fits that.

Simulating physics to the level of making meaningful predictions in chemistry is computationally infeasible. So no, we will not be atom-level simulating humans any time soon and LLMs cannot change that.

>The precise mechanism of action of dimethyl fumarate is not clear.

And here is the real problem. Instead of burning gigawatthours of power with GPUs, if Anthropic really wanted to help bioscience, they should just be throwing their $2 trillion at making it possible to live off of studying things like this.

We aren't in a place where a magic "Intelligence" could just look at the data and solve all our problems because we have never funded the collection of that data in the first place

We spent a lot of money on the Human Genome project and got large dividends from it but seemingly never reinvested! There's so many clear and straightforward questions we should be answering in biology that we just aren't, because nobody wants to pay for it.

LLMs aren't the right course here!

Would we have been allowed to dedicate $2 trillion dollars to mathematicians doing this?

I always find this funny.

Max Planck himself got to watch physics radically change multiple times, through avenues that didn't involve the old guard dying.