It seems to me like the "generation" use case of ML is much more promising than the "prediction" or "classification" use case. It's tough to predict things in general because our universe is fundamentally uncertain. How is some computer going to predict that some mugger sees a target at some random spot and decides to mug them? But the progress in text to image and text generation really blows my mind.
Eh, sounds like most of big tech TBH. When you're dealing with a money faucet situation it can be tough to tell what's a good decision and what's a bad decision since either choice will result in increased profits. That is, until the fed crashes the party.
Wow. I had no idea that these things had such fundamental limitations. I'd feel a lot less safer using one now, to be honest. If you had to estimate, how long would it be before AVs would be able to do all their calculations locally? Is that something that's even under consideration at the time?
First, it was "you're fired". That became too harsh so then we moved on to "layoffs". But that seeped into the popular lexicon too, so nowadays we say "your role has been impacted". I wonder what the next evolution will be. Maybe "we are enabling you to help the company cut costs" or something.
People will always find ways to screw themselves up. Trying to ban this or ban that is like playing whack a mole. It ends up being a contest of who can shout the loudest to gain the government's attention, which isn't fair and also hurts the economy. The only answer in my opinion is deregulation + strong family values to help raise kids right.
I'll let the other commenters do the debunking of this extremely stupid point you made - just want to point out that this is so clearly some shitty troll account. 5 months old and all the comments are idiotic crap like this.
The only people who this is an unpopular opinion to are the rich fat cat execs who only care about their profits and share prices. Pretty much everyone I know thinks it was a bad idea to outsource manufacturing to less than friendly countries. Thanks, Krugman.
I've read a few of Zeihan's books, and it seems like the author of this article is missing the point. Zeihan says, again and again, that basically the ONLY reason for the US pulling away from globalization is the new shale oil boom, which makes the country energy independent. My layman's understanding is that under the Biden administration regulators have hobbled these shale wells in the hope of achieving an energy "transition", whatever that may mean. So we aren't really energy independent after all, at least not until the transition is completed. So I'm not sure how the conclusions of the article really make sense, notwithstanding the many references to how you could get rich quick by betting on these outcomes.
I think it's more so that they fear the fed can't stop inflation without causing a recession. So they are holding cash as they think there's still a lot more pain yet to come in the markets. If inflation is 10%, but equities decline by 40%, then you're better off holding cash than equities.
I'm trying to think, do we have ANYTHING that gets even close to the criteria of 10k years? Yes, there's the bible and stuff, but that's not even close to 10k years old. It might be impossible on earth.
Your best bet may be to come up with some mathematical representation of the haiku, like the arecibo message, and send thousands of copies of it into the solar system, and hope that 10k years from now we will have the technology to find and decipher them.
Crypto really seems to attract some serious douche bags. I don't have any significant hate for crypto devs (at least they have some technical interests and talents), but any of these MBA type crypto people, I would definitely have second thoughts about hiring in the future.
Lol. Dish is such a dog shit company. They probably pay their employees like shit, so they can't compete technologically, so all they can really do is try to get daddy government to shut down innovation.
It's hard for me to tell how many of these "progressive" programs are motivated out of a sincere desire to make the world a better place, and how many are simply motivated by hate and spite, a "if I can't have it nobody can" kind of attitude. Certainly eliminating advanced classes seems to fall into the latter case.
I moved back to the bay area after spending 2 years back with friends and family during the pandemic, and it's got me feeling kinda down. I have some friends here which is nice, but for the most part nobody texts me, I barely know anyone around here, today I haven't talked to a single person, and it's just got me in the dumps. And the kicker is that this is probably how it will be from here on out for the rest of my life. I'm working out, I'm adapting, I'm making changes as best I can to deal with this transition, but I find myself with a lot more negative thoughts than usual.
It's less that I'm glad the market is crashing, and more that I'm glad that the insufferable crypto bros are finally getting a punch to the mouth. Seriously, these people are the worst. Your average "crypto investor" has no skills, no mathematical foundations, nothing. Except for pure stupid luck, and the ability to spew inane crypto babble 24/7. And yes, they think they are much smarter than you, because they achieved better financial results than you did while only doing 1/1000 of the work to get there. I truly hate the fact that these people are so rich. It makes me want to move to Alaska and just try to ignore society for the rest of my days.
This came off as pretty bitter. I apologize, but I am bitter, and I'm having a shit couple weeks.
I know a few people who I would consider to be in the 10x to 100x range. It really requires the extraordinary convergence of a few RNG factors. All these people I know are the types of people who are extremely intense about everything they do - marathon runners, extremely jacked bodybuilders, etc. They generally don't waste any time with vices such as drugs, video games, binge watching, etc - instead they really enjoy coding and spend every waking minute writing or reading code because it just genuinely interests them. That's what's tough - you need to be predisposed to being obsessive about things, and you need to naturally be able to redirect this energy into computers. Oh, and you also need good social skills, because nobody will want to work with you if you're weird. I'm honestly not sure if these things can be cultivated if you aren't naturally like this. I like computers and I'm obsessive, but not enough to give up all my vices, haha.
Windmills? They don’t work. They’re too expensive. They kill all the birds. They ruin your landscapes. Yet, the environmentalists love the windmills. I’ve been preaching this for years. The windmills. I had them way down. The windmills are the most expensive energy you can have, and they don’t work. They last a period of 10 years and by the time they start rusting and rotting all over the place nobody ever takes them down. They just go onto the next piece of prairie or land and destroy that. It’s incredible.
With the rise of social media. The modern "cancelling" could not exist without the viral phenomena that social media enables. Of course, you could always be fired for saying unaceptable things in the past, but now it actually ruins your entire life, you can't escape it.
> There are plenty of examples of words and behaviours that were commonplace and then over time evolved to be unacceptable to use in polite company.
Cmon man, there's a big difference between the natural evolution of language and some radical-run company forcibly jamming their desired changes down our throats through an instantaneous and global software update.
Yeah that's where I'm at as well. In fact this makes me like Sandberg more for being a regular person who is attempting to shield their loved ones from harm.
Honestly, it's pretty pathetic that multiple people respond to your post with legitimate examples, and you completely ignore them, instead only responding here. Whatever it takes to protect your fragile little worldview, I guess.
Agreed, I even remember audio of earnings reports at NBC or some other ginormous media outlet, where the CEO was basically like "he may not be good for the country, but he's good for our business".
I mean yeah, that's certainly a bad fact, but my whole point is that facts can be cherry picked. I would guess that there are other facts out there which would support the opinion that it is a success - for example, the other commenter said 1.4 million people were on the waitlist, which certainly indicates some marketing success in attracting millions of users.
This is my issue with the media is that they selectively report facts in order to push their agendas. This is why it seems like Fox and MSNBC are in alternate realities. Obviously, they're not just blatantly making shit up (although some outlets certainly do).