923 karma · joined September 18, 2022
> But these profits are capped, and any additional revenue will be pumped back into the OpenAI nonprofit that was founded back in 2015.
> His grand idea is that OpenAI will capture much of the world’s wealth through the creation of A.G.I. and then redistribute this wealth to the people. In Napa, as we sat chatting beside the lake at the heart of his ranch, he tossed out several figures — $100 billion, $1 trillion, $100 trillion.
How believable that is, who knows.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/31/technology/sam-altman-ope...
> the market just wants the software and if the software works the same, the hardware is replaceable
And likely to be true given how much competition is heating up in the AI hardware space. Granted, many of these competitors and startups especially have existed for years and haven’t made much of a dent. Even Google’s TPU doesn’t seem that much better than Nvidia’s stuff based on their limited MLPerf score releases. Maybe this “iPhone moment” for AI will change that and force competitors to finally put some real effort in it.
As for Nvidia, looks like they are trying to adapt by selling their own enterprise software solutions such as Omniverse and their AI model customization stuff. Will be interesting to see if they can transform into more of a software solutions provider going forward.
Great talk between them. Ilya makes an interesting point about how the NN used in ChatGPT learns a representation of the process that produced the text and as such has some inherent world model, i.e., not just a stochastic parrot.
Regardless, I’m always happy to tax the truly wealthy more.
Is it that most of your applicants are liars with what they put on their resume? Or that those specific skills you mentioned aren’t applicable to their day-to-day work? Or is that your expectations are out of line with the reality of their work or is there something amiss with your interview style?
I’m not expecting the singularity within that timeframe nor do I think we need it for lots of disruption in knowledge-based work. Still, I’m leaning towards a near future where these AI tools augment our capabilities more than the alternative where we lose all our jobs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_obesity_r...
Obesity vs overweight (the former is surely a better predictor of health outcomes anyway) aside, we’re definitely higher than comparable nations, but I wouldn’t say significantly so.
If you (or anyone else reading this) are in the SF Bay Area in a similar situation and are looking for potential friends, hit me up at my profile email
> Nutrition research tends to be unreliable because nearly all of it is based on observational studies, which are imprecise, have no controls, and don’t follow an experimental method. As nutrition-research critics Edward Archer and Carl Lavie have put it, “’Nutrition’ is now a degenerating research paradigm in which scientifically illiterate methods, meaningless data, and consensus-driven censorship dominate the empirical landscape.”
The specifics of the recent “eggs are bad” study is just shocking:
> The new study linking eggs and cardiovascular disease deserves similar scrutiny. Statistically speaking, 30,000 participants makes for a very powerful study. And in fairness, the study’s defenders say that it did a good job accounting for factors that might have influenced the findings, such as overall fat consumption, smoking, and lifestyle.
> But on the other hand, the study tracked participants’ health outcomes over periods ranging from 13 to more than 30 years, and participants were queried about their diet only once, at the beginning of the study. […] Who eats the same way for 10 years?
What a joke.
Maybe I should start looking around for these rent controlled places…