ItsMattyG

if you're into litrpg, have you tried the wandering inn? it's not so meaty but it's above almost all other litrpgs in that department and the storytelling is great

eventually it will be pennies, but based on current trends i'd bet value outpaces price decreases for a while once it actually becomes an employee replacement

the demand then will rise and prices will rise in tandem

it is of course possible that 'deep learning hits a wall' and they don't get there, but i wouldn't bet on it

true, and humanity may all be dead due to rogue ai or speciation, so maybe there'd be no humans around to care

say more?

you can't reason about currently because the entire economy will change before collapsing completely - there will be a poor class and a rich class

they won't need their advertising models because they'll have a new oligopoly on ai, and make the money directly from b2b

which yes, will completely destroy the consumer economy and social structures and current forms of governance

sure there will be, people who own the means of production will buy everything, and rule over the peasants

like in the good old days

... the people who are currently paying workers

as ai becomes an actual replacement for workers, costs will rise to what you would pay a worker, and $6T will be easy

it seems fairly obvious to me that once ai becomes as good as a worker, people will pay a workers wages to use it - 24/7, can't quit, can't complain that badly, no lunch breaks

productivity tooling replaces employees

What makes it false?

FWIW, my rationalist friends were warning about Covid before I had heard about it from others, and talking about AI before it was on others radar.

But if you have an AI then all that's needed to implement an api is documentation

For now

Francois'(the creator of ARC-AGI benchmark) whole point was that while they look the same, they're not. Coding is solving a familiar pattern in the same way (and fails when it' s NOT doing that, it just looks like it doesn't happen because it's seen SO MANY patterns in code). But the point of Arc AGI is to make each problem have to generalize in some new ay.

Because it empirically doesn't lead to as good hires as asking about past experiences.

ChatGPT does this. You just click an arrow and it will show you other branches.

Interesting, for me this is only true as long as the AI generated content is worse.

There's some things I really care about the human experience for, but much content it just matters to me if it's a joy to ride.

Eventually models will likely get their creativity by:

1. Interacting with the randomness of the world

and

2. Thinking a lot, going in loops and thought loops and seeing what they discover.

I don't expect them to need humans forever.

This is literally what the whole article was about. Not only does the quote itself contain that context "and the lego group", but the very next paragraph is "And then… nothing. The Tintin votes dried up, and Lego rejected both his fan-favorite Avatar and Polar Express ideas. The company never says why it rejects an Ideas submission, only that deciding factors include everything from “playability” and “brand fit” to the difficulties in licensing another company’s IP."

oh hmm, the penguin/giraffe one when I first saw it I was like "that looks like an upside down penguin, where's the giraffe?" Whereas others I immediately saw what it was trying to be.

My understanding is that they trained a separate model to specifically estimate when they have enough context to begin translating, as a skilled translator would.

Right, but techniques like chain of thought reasoning can build concepts on concepts. Even if "the thing that generated the text" isn't creating new concepts, the text itself can be, because the AI has learned general patterns like reasoning and building upon previous conclusions.

I also like to surprise my friends, family, and aardvarks with the occasional lamp post.

Not so. He shows an example of the 10 he chose from, basically all were good.

Let's just keep moving those goal posts.

I didn't consider Mother of Learning to have logical, well-structured magic. Curious what gave you that feeling

It's not on the NYT to help him, he's already managing fine on his own, it's on the NYT to not try to punish him by breaking the anonymity that's allowed him to both continue his job and practice his free speech without affecting that.

The original comment was assuming his partner more often did the laundry, which could explain the difference...

It's especially egregious here in a hit piece that deliberately makes the things he said horrible.

But even if it was an accurate representation, the media has to ask "is it our job as a powerful outlet to literally punish this much less powerful person because they have opinions we disagree with".

If it wasn't "opinions we disagree with" but like "has killed 3 people" sure appoint yourself judge, jury, and executioner. But in other cases yes it makes you an asshole to think that you should enforce your will by punishing someone who disagrees with you.