I have a couple friends who did the Math tripos at Cambridge (so a pretty high level!) who work in tech and have unanimously said they have 0% expectations of an LLM doing a millennium problem anytime soon
I think you'll find the most succinct requirements for a program is the code itself - you can add more and more logic to guide GPT to generate something but eventually you're just writing code yourself anyway.
Thinking about this, can you think of a great hacker who isn't C-level? Look at the most famous programmers of all time, or people who've made the most popular tools like Ruby on Rails, and they're all C-level.
I worked on a large financial transaction system for up to $7B per day in Haskell that used formal methods like Agda, TLA+, etc, with a lot of logic in the type level (i.e. Liquid Haskell), as a test engineer. The entire system was covered in property based tests, proofs, and then normal tests from unit -> system. We literally had two bugs categorised as P2/P1/P0 on release, both of which were design related, and both were fixed before users saw them. It was crazy effective (but took years).
IMO and experience a good product manager is far more important than a good engineer or good scientist
Elon Musk’s neuralink is a good example - the work they’re doing there was attacked by academics saying they’d done this years ago and it’s not novel, yet none of them will be the ones who ultimately bring it to market.
Sign the letter and support Sam so you have a place at Microsoft if OpenAI tanks and have a place at OpenAI if it continues under Sam, or don’t sign and potentially lose your role at OpenAI if Sam stays and lose a bunch of money if Sam leaves and OpenAI fails.
I'd rather work close to AGI - which I do not believe is the case personally - was handled by the adults in the room anyway, than some startup with a bunch of personalities.
I think the only edge cases are for executives of companies, and even then it's pretty limited, but I imagine this could be one of the examples. IANAL though - it's just from what I've seen discussed elsewhere.
Adverts cost $450k a day (according to gaming articles on Xbox's advert in October), they also have 18,600 seats inside the LV Sphere for "immersive experiences".
I actually hate the Sphere. It's such an ugly dystopian future where we have giant orbs blasting adverts into peoples homes/hotel rooms. I'm not a fan of the billboards in NY either but these spheres are on another level, I feel like we're moving towards a Futurama future.
Sam is rich, I assume being CEO of one of the worlds largest companies is a far greater award than extra money when you're at the billionaire level, especially at 38. But I do think this is probably non-compete related too.
He was president of YC, I think it's fair to say people will think he's got a better set of credentials on a YC forum than some omg-ai-is-dangerous-please-fund-me think tank thinker.
It's getting far more regulated though, and that's a good thing - big Pharma pushing drugs to doctors is one of the most sickening parts of capitalism.
Fair enough, I googled and used the first reputable source I could find. But sure, including the two other PACs, this is still IMO small change. I thought we were talking hundreds of millions or even billions regarding the NRA.
So with regards to FTX these were listed in the same spreadsheet as "Gifts", and there were some, but we're still talking low five figures for the majority of politicians. And it's not like FTX were not willing to spend more, they spent $68M on Tom Brady and Giselle for a two year contract to advertise FTX, or $500k on hotel rooms for interns in Miami.