13,405 karma · joined November 10, 2019
...
>It seems to me, that the AI tech companies would like us to conform to their standards, rather than spend the time and energy to conform to ours.
The entire argument is ugly and unfamiliar methods are used, and nobody's got time to drop everything and understand all that, meanwhile OpenAI didn't even ask us about this, therefore we should reject the paper as "unreadable" and you should be "very angry at OpenAI" today.
No, it's the press where you need to direct your anger. That is the nature of the beast. And being arrogant at the time of mass-disruption is a great way to lose control of everything. Maybe Sam should be sending the bottle of whisky to you.
"Access can be cut off, centralizing the use of AI in the hands of the companies that own it and whomever they choose to allow access, similar to the advantage enjoyed by Bronze Age kings who controlled stores of tin."
Open models directly contradict that. Anyone can "put evil AI" into pretty much anything at this point. Access is really just access to foundry chips. The modern day tin access is silicon, not AI.
Turns out, they're on top of this.
https://cswd.net/cswd-in-the-news/vermont-expands-battery-re...
"Fix One of America's Scariest Roads?"
One neat thing about this announcement is we will finally have apples-to-apples ownership costs and reliability data.
1992 was 33 years ago; this is almost an unremarkable event. It will be superseded by whatever happens in AI news by the end of the month.