glimshe

It seems that, one by one, every bastion against fearmongering click baits shall eventually fall...

They might as well rename it to "This one new threat could kill your family"

It will be tough to draw the line, as the meat brains trying to prove it were also using AI.

I assume that the mathematicians outside Anthropic were hoping to publish an actual human-understandable paper. That could be one way to draw line: you can use AI, but you must also have an intelligible explanation at the end.

Wouldn't the proof be attributed to the people who operated the AI? After all, it took more than writing a "prove the navier Stokes Clay problem" prompt.

Very cool! What are the most interesting things I could do with these? I know there are a few old games but what else worth pursuing? Payroll simulator? :)

Yes, but let's not fall on the false dichotomy trap. The options aren't only "reject AI" and "completely rely on AI".

> "hands-on coding skills are atrophying to some degree"

It really depends on how you define "coding", right? Throughout my career coding meant many different things. In the beginning, coding was really Assembly. Then it became C. Then C++/OOP. Then Java/C# and managed memory languages. Then Python etc.

These languages aren't the same thing with different syntax. The details that matter in the act of "coding" changed dramatically. It really went from "bit thinking" in the assembly era to stitching open source libraries in the Python era. Many would excel in one paradigm but not the other.

Coding with AI requires a different set of skills. I see the proper command of AIs through prompts and human-made specs as hand coding as much as building line-by-line micro algorithms in Assembly.

I think the noise in this discussion comes from putting vibe coding and AI-assisted coding in the same bucket. I'd argue that pure vibe coding is perhaps the one thing that doesn't resemble traditional coding as much. But the AI coding approach where people gradually build applications through the accumulation of components and layers built with heavy AI assistance is hand coding.

I can see that relying on AI assistance for too long could atrophy the skill of manual line-by-line mental model transcription, but I never really cared too much for this skill. Once I have the right data structures and algorithms in my head, actually entering the if, else, class, struct, for, etc statements are a giant annoyance.

In this context, a "car" is a vehicle with some sort of engine, as opposed to a horse, mule, carriage or other animal-powered vehicle. Those who rejected cars when they came out would also happily reject buses, cabs and even trains.

Emotional rejection of AI will lead to the same outcome as emotional rejection of cars, the printing press and computers.

Additionally, when it comes to the software field, it will be a sure way of selecting yourself out of the work pool.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--bH6O2_Vvk

This. I don't like people using others' work without giving proper credit. At the same time, people are jumping too quickly to defend these mathematicians without any solid evidence of their claims, while framing this as some sort of "Evil AI Company vs human mathematicians".

In the best case scenario, the mathematicians were standing on the shoulders of the extensive training data from sources that aren't being credited and they may not even have had access to.

I have nothing against these mathematicians because I don't know them. And given that, there's no reason to trust their word any more than OpenAI's.

It's possible the work they were doing, even if related, was a dead end and immaterial to OpenAI's findings. Or maybe they are right and OpenAI stole their work. Who knows the truth right now?

In other words, we need more evidence before making accusations.

Why are people here jumping so quickly to conclusions? I have no doubt OpenAI is capable of doing this, but right now there's no credible evidence, only claims.

This kind of "they stole from me through AI training!" accusation will soon start being used against other AI users, not necessarily the providers.

All it will take is a mastodon post. And shortly after, we will also see the next iteration of copyright legal trolling.

Nuclear Weapons is a great example because, unlike AI, it is a real and present danger. Civilization could be catastrophically diminished, if not completely wiped out, literally today.

Most retail outside a few niches (hunting, sports, videogames, etc) cater largely to female shoppers.

Our customers have spoken and we are listening. The 12V power outlet in your car now requires a $9.99/month unlimited use fee or an affordable per-watt charge you can pay with a CarBucks card found in all major retailers!

In the hippie generation, not everybody was a hippie. And most gave up on that way of life pretty quickly or were never fully immersed to begin with. I had a girlfriend who dressed like a hippie, had many "alternative" friends and loved new age stuff, but otherwise worked full time and was completely part of the system.

I'm not saying everybody will be fine. I'm saying humanity will be fine because we will figure out how to create a functional world despite the underlying culture like we've always done. Part of my argument is that every generation is full of people saying "this time is different because of XYZ".

Every generation worries that the behaviors of the next will be the downfall of humanity. I wouldn't be surprised if the Greeks and Romans felt the same.

I grew up reading and still do it today. But my teen kid, who's a great student, hates reading books. He knows many things but gets all his information from Discord chats, AI and social media videos (and his parents, but he ignores that).

It does sound terrifying. "Grew up reading Gemini". But, at the same time, I think it's going to be okay. Hippies, role playing gamers and punk rockers also terrified parents and most of us turned out fine.

It's a bit disappointing, I'm sorry to say. It's just not as funny as it looks. I went to the movie with the whole family and, despite loving Road Runner, it felt repetitive and stale.

Not too bad, but not great either. If you lower your expectations you may enjoy it more than we did.

True, by imprisoning their tech CEOs until they can unambiguously support the dictators.

If all AI researchers worried about the AI-pocalypse slow down, progress slows down.

But if they instead pout and quit their jobs, nothing changes.

I have not considered that and neither I have a reason to given China's love of large military projects like the US.

For decades we've suffered the crushing hand of Big Copyright. As the little guys, we could do nothing.

I'd never expected to see commercial entities with a lot of money and political/military connections depending on the weakening of copyright for survival.

For now, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

You are confusing privacy with copyright.

Lack of protections didn't stop Homer and a "few" others.

I agree with everything you said and I wondered... Isn't this just the next level of the concentration of discovery in universities and science labs?

Centuries ago, going perhaps only as far as 19th century, much of science was done as a hobby by people who had the smarts and the time (which was a luxury).

Over time, the cost to do science increased gradually. What required just a few hours of free time started requiring many hours. Then money to make small machines. Then big machines... Then it became out of reach for almost any private individual.

Now it's out of reach for anyone who doesn't have data centers full of GPUs, even major universities depending on the field.

What do people feel about this in China? Even if their models are well behind, they are not years behind. If we restrain US companies, assuming that is desirable, it would do nothing to deter China's and AI-pocalypse would come anyway in short notice.

Perhaps a more sensible action, if they truly believed all of that, would have been to stick around and be as inefficient as possible to slow down progress.

It's not useful for actual work, but the fact it can be run at all shows that we're evolving towards enabling powerful LLMs to run locally.

When publishing a post complaining about AI, one should not completely generate it with AI.

It's a boring read. Don't click.

My PM buddies speak like this about any subject.

I know a lot of people who use AI, but literally nobody who uses Mistral.

>at a time when you had to be a research superstar to apply for a tenure track job at a third rate college.

Is it any less competitive now?