throw310822

Yesterday I was watching a tv program online on the legitimate website of the broadcaster, but I was really annoyed at the fact that the video stopped whenever I left the tab. So I opened Chrome's devtools, went to the AI tab ad exposed my complaint. In a few seconds it had analysed all the minified sources of the website, found which tracker was responsible of this, and written a script to disable it. Lovely.

LOL

The existence and quality of other ideas doesn't make this one better or worse. This is just plain dumb.

Besides, yes I have better ideas- the ones we are currently implementing now, reducing the demand of fossil fuels by providing alternatives. The problem is that energy is what keeps 8 billion people alive. Cut the flow of energy or substantially increase its price, and billions will die.

> The way you reduce demand in a capitalist society is by beating board members to death until society "decides" to improve

I can't imagine how someone can believe something so stupid. So if we kill the owners or board members of an oil company, the company ceases to produce and the total oil consumption decreases by the amount that company used to produce? Is this really what you believe?

Are you sure that the logic of an attack such as 9/11 is that you are directly punishing the individual victims? I don't think so- the attackers don't care if the victims are innocent or guilty, they just think that the action will produce some desired consequence.

Exactly like Israelis bombing civilian buildings, btw.

What if there was a terrorist action involving murdering German families that could have interfered with the Holocaust?

Not sure how reliable is this guy- and I don't think at all that he is referring literally to explosive devices, but just to long-running intelligence and spying operations with sophisticated logistics.

Anyway consider this. If you were Israel, where would you put more effort in:

1) fighting off a militia that is in no case a match for a country armed with F35s and nuclear weapons;

2) keep benefiting from the "unwavering" support of the West (and, by a lesser extent, the flow of money from the US)- which both grants you a state-of-the-art army and weapons, and a full diplomatic cover and support in any circumstance, from the most important actors in the world.

Now consider the amount of effort and ingenuity they put in 1), and infer the amount of effort and ingenuity they must be putting in 2).

The authors could still design their prompts to steer players towards predefined developments and situations. Anyway, the possibilities of something like this are infinite, the only constraint will be the cost of the compute.

You could produce immersive VR content specified only by prompts and in which any action is possible.

It's interesting because the simultaneity proves how easy it was. Irrespective of whether they were independently working on the same problem, or someone in one company alerted the other, the fact that they arrived at it together can only mean that they just had to point their model to the problem to have it solved (they say it costed 14M tokens which is a nothing at API prices).

So Anthropic claims that Claude disproved ETH on October 16, the exact same day OpenAI did it.

Ok, I don't know the details, but if the land had been re-zoned for industrial use, it was obvious that it was going to be cleared of the forest.

If you think about it, it's a tiny portion of territory that had been already sold to Google, presumably with full knowledge of what they were going to do with it. There are comparatively huge areas in Finland that have been cleared from the forest to make space for human activities of all kinds.

I don't get it, what did they expect when they sold a 3x2km area to Google to build a data center?

The space around the town is entirely cultivated land for tens of kms across, hundreds of times the land that they sold to Google- and that land too once had been forest and was felled by the Finns to make space for agriculture. Is anyone outraged about this?