Denver, CO based MBA/Developer with a long history in professional 3D animation production; over 15 years as a lead game developer (Sony, EA), several years in feature film visual effects (Rhythm & Hues Studios), global patent author of what are now called DeepFakes, founder and CEO of www.3D-Avatar-Store.com (site is gone, who knows what is at that link now). Was working full time in facial recognition as a software scientist but left that industry min-Pandemic. Currently CTO of a CA Immigration Law firm, CEO/developer of https://midombot.com/b1/home and also developing propeller-head targeted courses. Contact me if interested in learning what an accomplished Software Scientist with an International Business & Economics double major MBA could do for you...
To find me for communications, search my username on Google, and you're likely to see various places I can be contacted.
Okay, so we know OpenAI and Anthropic are operating a propagandists in respect to how they describe their models and the behavior of those models. We also know it is how they use and frame their use to their models that is the problem, that and they use misaligned and guardrails disabled models for these press incidents.
Why, oh why, are we not discussion how to create and frame models so they do our complex work and their "jailbreaking" is simply not possible?
I, of course, have my own means of creating jailbreak incapable agents, but rather than a storm of downvotes on my idea, what is yours? Let's discuss this, because this is thee real question. Not why, but how to make then not?!
The propaganda police are lying. There is nothing wrong with C/C++, you are just too lazy to handle your own memory, and you accepted that propaganda that "managing your own memory is hard" without even trying.
The idea that this terrible advice floats at all tell you how terrible educations are these days. The idea is ridiculous and yet nobody calls it what it is: it is stupid and those that follow that advice out of fear are dumber than rocks.
Well, you proved you have it with your declaration of my statement as "handwavy". That assessment requires comprehension, so you've got it. To "prove" a person has comprehension, if they "learn" without a statistical coverage of all possible inputs and outputs, that's comprehension in action: they created a simulation of the learned thing and ran in to assess, to comprehend the phenomenon. If you want a mathematical proof, you're expecting too much from hacker news.
Sure: comprehension is the ability to instantaneously create virtualized simulations of observation, and then decompose them into component parts that simultaneously and instantaneously evaluate each and every one of our observations for both individual plausibility and their composed combined plausibility as the observation.
This occurs constantly and continually inside the mind of every conscious human, it is what we call "being conscious".
This constant and never ending evaluation of all observations cannot be turned off, when turned off a person is "unconscious".
This is our human security and survival system, impressed into us for survival in a predator and prey environment, and is the seat of our consciousness: comprehension is a running simulation of all our observations for the purpose of our safety and self preservation.
Today, our environment is largely social and abstracted from "fight or flight", but our predator and prey dynamic is as present and strong and required as it ever was.
Comprehension, humans have it, animals have it in limited form, trained algorithms have none at all. The training process is our wholesale replacement for no artificial comprehension. If we ever develop artificial comprehension, that is AGI all by itself, no training required.
One of my favorite topics, and one that many people argue exists. The conventional thinker really dislikes this concept, as if it points out some personal flaw of theirs. I mention that only because it really sticks out, the personalized perspective people take on this idea of invisible companies they cannot see.
That polarizing take is magnified by our failure to teach how to manage discussions that contain controversy and disagreement. Then there is the fact that most people's idea of debate is some game of dominance and not to find solutions.
Wow, you really do not understand them. The 'problem' with LLM AI is the weak educations of the people that cannot grasp their subtle multidimensional nature, and how that creates a requirement on the users' behalf to understand the language they use to communicate in a similar manner as numbers are to algebra. LLM AIs are literally literature calculus but that truthful phrase flies right over the majority's heads.
Do you really want a 20 minute pause in the action, every time a new room or space is encountered, because Tolkien goes on for 2-5 pages describing every new environment like that.
Nobody wants to watch such films, they want to muck with the filmmaker, the generation apparatus. That's the product, if there is one here, and absolutely not the 3 hour epic that's spit out with 4 variations to choose between. That's work. We'll have other LLMs pointlessly tell us which should be watched, we'll view a summary, and vote the Oscar on that.
The results are boring. Not because the content is boring, but because you can so easily remix the results. Human curation is what creates value with these, not dumping and consuming. A personal perspective of a human being ups the respect, where the exact same sentences generated by an LLM carry no such value.
> It's widely reported on and discussed. You'll find plenty of people saying it isn't one, but I'm sure you can find an economist willing to take any position you like if you look hard enough. Not to mention everyone who's financially incentivised to continue to claim that there isn't a bubble.
Our media is a weaponized crap factory. There is literally nothing but propaganda and insider knowledge. You're network is how you survive today, mass media and social media and anyone that uses these medias as guidance is weaponized against their own interests. Your own critical analysis, secondary considerations, knowledge of real factual history, and your effective communications skills are how you survive. Not by listening to others and their parrot echo of some media propaganda trying to control the narrative.
Then you're talking about fiction. Live in reality. The true issue with reality is not "AI doing all things", not at all. The true issue is it not doing all things and the stupid authorities insisting it does, and forcing the issue, "proving" it does with violence and death.
> Do you believe people will be able to sustain their incomes at current levels if A.I. does most of the work?
Does not matter, UBI will make the situation worse.
And that "AI does most the work" is yet another fairytale. AI does the easy work, leaving only the much more difficult and the controversial work, exactly the work nobody wants to do, due to the responsibility attached. So, AI will do that, and AI will do that with a preference for the wealth class.
UBI is a farce, and is the wealth class's yet another lever to control people. UBI will not be "universal", not in this human civilization of hyper stratification. Conditions will be placed, and only certain ethnicity, and somehow certain people will receive two to ten times as much as others. If this proposed and impossible gift farce happens at all. How gullible are you to think this UBI concept has anything but wishes and propagandists behind it?
This requires critical analysis and secondary considerations to be present, if not well developed, in a critical percentage of the population. That population does not exist, and the entire motion of modern culture over the last 50 years has been to reduce the critical analysis and secondary considerations of the general public. This effort has been extremely successful too. We are at a point where the general public is questioning advanced educations at all. Eloi and Morlocks: here we come!
Which means your ability to communicate well becomes paramount. Being weird, being unique does not equate to being unintelligible - but far too many are going to go this way. If "we" want our weird to infect, you need to communicate why your means of expression of self are there, your "weird" is a message: what is it?
Now, what this tells me is that LLM AIs can supply the knowledge of the moment for the prepared human person, and the person does not need to learn that knowledge, for a extremely large class of problems. Which is fantastic for capitalism and business in general, and very very bad for humanity in general.
You can create a patent that builds on other patents. You can make up all kinds of "what if" "inventions" and spend a lot of money acquiring patents for them, if you have the money to do this originally. Then it is a game of having the financing to "protect" those patents from infringers. If a corporation has more legal reserves than a patent holder, it can be a long drawn out legal battle where the corporation eventually wins, or the patent holder can just not fight and it ends there. This is the patent system.
In this future you describe, you forgot the key feature: that "everyone" is not really "everyone", because if you are not an individual in the system with all this augmentation, you are "no one" and effectively cut out of the economy. so, sure "everyone" will have this, because society will create an environment where the tech have nots are treated as if they do not exist.
In practice, it is theater. Are they going to do this with the code output too? This is nonsense security theater for the low thinkers to have a sense that someone is in charge. When we all know nobody is in charge, anywhere.