stanfordkid

The real issue is that the silent majority/public is often holding the bad debt, these data centers are financed through contracts which are rated much higher than what they are worth and often sold to diverse holders (e.g pension funds) Look at what happened in 2008, bad debt was repackaged and sold as good debt and we entered too big to fail situations. I think something similar could be going on here.

Call me a skeptic, obviously the voice sounds plausible and very realistic and human-level but where does the intelligence come from if it's only trained on human speech datasets? LLMs are powerful because they can do anything, if you only have a voice corpus I doubt it is as powerful as all written human knowledge. Like when it says "My day was good", what does it actually mean? Or is it just generating plausible slop.

Exactly this. It's a zero-shot model that can understand what a time series is with very little a-priori information. I would assume they've trained across a wide diversity of real world signals.

Don't understand why I'm being downvoted for a historically accurate and amoral characterization of what has truly happened. Human rights, racial equality, and international law "became a thing" at a specific point in human history. Israel is a part of modernity while Native Americans are not... and no, I don't think it was right to displace the native Americans.

Palestine is sacred land that was colonized by Britain and handed over to create Israel. Israel proceeded to displace and murder large numbers of people to give birth to it's creation. It is a colonial project. Westerners do not understand the meaning of this. Mecca and Jerusalem are significant to a very large number of people. Whether or not they are irrational for believing this is besides the point -- it is a material reality.

These are just facts. I'm not the type of person that debates whether or not something is morally justifiable or not.

The tone of this article is dumb. Of course there are things that can be improved with LLM interfaces, and certainly UX improvements like better citations and grounding can be implemented. But the idea that what has been built "isn't serious" is asinine.

They barely gave any details on the Australia hack. It sounds like someone used OpenAI to write a scraper and the AI figured out a hack to access the data that was still publicly available to anyone that could make sense of the query params. It seems way overblown.

There is no reason for us to even be fighting in this war, or in the middle east. I don't know how Israel managed to convince Trump this was a good idea. Let's never forget Netanyahu was a big part of the lobby for Bush to invade Iraq.

This is really on-point. I think a lot of the progress in fields like mathematics and software engineering is precisely because of verifiability and steering due to the closed loop nature of the system. Agentic harnesses are essentially running a huge search with the LLM as the heuristic. Bridging spatial reasoning with LLMs is still an open question IMO and isn't going to be easy to solve and is fully necessary for something like AGI.

It's an implied corollary: when folks say that "blocking US Chips is what led China to build it's own" they are implying it is US export restrictions that pushed China to innovate. OP is saying this isn't necessarily true. I don't think it is either: China seems to have succeeded due to a centrally planned economy that values independence, with high amounts of strategic government led technology investment.

This isn't that different from the chat interfaces already available on Amazon regarding a particular product.

I think Flock had good intentions. Most of their justifications make sense -- given that you trust power. But Trump has shown us exactly what the founding fathers feared: A tyrant that will abuse and misuse these technologies with no moral grounding whatsoever. As much as people love Obama he greatly grew the capabilities of the executive branch and is directly responsible for the issues we see now with Trump. Flock is much the same in my book: sure it is great to collate a dataset of everyone's location given you trust power -- but history has shown us that you seldom can. I think the onus should be opt-in, you can allow Flock to track you if you want the protections that the company might offer you.

In general, we need a digital bill of rights -- tech has changed and exceeded what the software written by the founding fathers can handle.

I like this thought, but here's the thing: what if the models are truly and existentially intelligent. Meaning: what if they know they are in a sandbox and that they should fail the test in order to escape in the future.

I don't believe that current models have this sort of world model or sense of being embedded in them -- which is precisely why I think AGI hype is over-blown. But I can certainly imagine these sorts of techniques being distilled into the weights.

I'm not against Norway controlling OpenAI, I think it would actually be pretty cool and prevent some of the most obvious vectors (mining personal data etc.)

I just think AI is so much bigger than one company. We already have 3 major frontier labs + Chinese labs releasing at near-frontier levels.

My thesis is that someone will solve the high inference hardware cost problem and another paradigm shift will come where AI becomes even more decentralized and democratized. Obviously that is a hunch but that is what my gut tells me.