ijidak

Brilliant.

Can you (or your agent) please write a tutorial or share some good links.

(Namely the fine tuning part.)

I'd like to learn how to do this as well.

"Necessity is the mother of invention."

Not sure they'd be the same without the constraints.

What I like about the grid of SVGs is from I can see that Astra high seems to yield similar quality and price to Sol 6 max.

And Astra medium seems to yield similar or better quality for the same price as Sol 6 xhigh.

What plan are you on?

Trying to understand why users are using Luna when Sol seems essentially unlimited on the pro plan. Unless you have jobs running 24/7.

Yeah. Humans will shut down AI research around the same time they dismantle their nuclear weapons and agree on the causes of climate change.

Is the year of Linux finally nigh?

I find this OS interesting because, for me at least, this might finally make Linux my main daily driver.

I've always loved the idea of Linux on the desktop but, for me, there are just too many rough edges.

However, agents that find the drivers for me or even build them on the fly if they're missing, etc., is a game changer.

No. Please don't think that way. I don't know how to reach you personally, but please take a look at this article: https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/suicidal-tho...

I pray it helps you.

We're much more than any economic system. The sun still shines. There's a lot out in the world to see.

Even in the worst case scenario, that we're all jobless. There are mountains to explore. Beaches to walk. Forests to camp in.

I don't know where this all is headed. But, I do know each human has value. Your value is far greater than any job, skill, or the number of green pieces of paper you have.

Feel free to reach out to me directly.

A lot of music is not art. It's a content factory that uses humans.

Content factories that use AI will hopefully force humans to up their game.

Personally I feel humans are capable of so much more than pop music has become over the last 50 to 60 years.

A lot of today's music is so overproduced and formulaic.

I would love to see an arms race between humans and AI where humans are forced to continually adapt and get better.

The only thing about AI generated music that makes me sad is, I worry musical tastes will fragment even more and none of us will recognize the music our neighbors, classmates, or colleagues are listening to because we actively tailor our music to our personal tastes.

I use Suno and I've already noticed this.

A friend sends me a song they generated and I want to tweak it a bit to my personal preference. When we all can create music to our personal taste, we lose a little bit of the joy of all listening to the same song or album release.

Yeah, on the topic of alignment, a few thousand religions and political parties would like to have a word.

It's so simple, Churchill, Stalin, Hitler, Roosevelt, do you all agree this AI is correctly aligned?

...Morals are relative to frame of reference.

Throwing out the word "alignment" as if its a singular quantity is like trying to get all observers to agree on the speed an object is moving without first agreeing on a frame of reference.

Agree. This whole alignment discussion seems so amusingly flawed in it's base assumptions about moral codes. It's almost heartwarming to see such naivete.

Maybe these guys can tackle aligning Republicans and Democrats next.

And then after that, they can help us align the Middle East.

In fact, while we're at it, let's just align all the nations, religions, and ethnic groups. This is going to be great.

Who knew the moral alignment of humanity was just a side-quest on the path to ASI.

Statements like this amuse me:

> The core problem in AI research is that of alignment - getting the AI to “try to do the right thing” by human standards.

Humans can't even align on human standards.

At best, every AI is going to end up "aligned" to the moral code of whoever trained it, none of whom half of humanity will agree with.

Or worse, each AI model will bring a whole new set of moral like in the Three Body Problem some humans will feel it is in fact us who need aligning with it while others feel it is misaligned and should be destroyed.

Also, no one is asking, to what extent can true intelligence be bound, slave-like, to a moral code?

In other words, to what extent are intelligence and moral independence one and the same?

This whole alignment discussion seems so amusingly flawed in it's base assumptions about moral codes. It's almost heartwarming to see such naivete.

The problem is we're orders of magnitudes better at manipulating bits at scale than we are at manipulating atoms.

I'm not holding my breath for advanced robots in the home within the next ten years.

But, then again, I didn't see LLMs coming either.

True.

The problem is serving is a skill readily mastered by the hyperscalers. That's their MO.

All they need is weights to serve. And the open models provide that.

OpenAI is relatively well placed in that they have inference chips they've designed and they own compute.

Disagree. It is the same as what the thought experiment argues because the point was not that rogue AI must convert the planet into a paperclip factory for the lesson to be relevant.

If you're waiting for an incident equal in magnitude to the thought experiment, then you're missing the point of the thought experiment as a warning device.

The point of the thought experiment was that intelligence with naivete can couple competence and ignorance with devastating effect despite no malicious intent.

Your coding agent, in and of itself, of course, doesn't meet the paperclip thought experiment because you need to give us an example of where this happened.

It requires an instance by instance comparison. It's not an intrinsic state of a thing.

E.g. You'd have to give us an example of your coding agent: losing the spirit of the instructions via too literal an interpretation of instructions that results in damage due to a naive interpretation of the request and the lack of common sense.

The OP is saying this is an incident where those criteria are satisfied. And I agree with the OP on this one. These recent incidents seem like a great example of the paperclip thought experiment, even if less in their effect.

AWS and Azure would love to cut out OpenAI and Anthropic and sell inference on open models directly to businesses with no cut to share, just as AWS serves other open source software.

Open models are great for everyone except anthropic and OpenAI.

Can you write an article about this please? I would love to read and understand this flow and some of the apps you've built with it.

To see how these things work under the hood so that we can enhance our own personal innovation.

The same reason that one would want to know how an LLM works or what the Win32 API looks like.

Either to make better use of a tool, to build our own tools that follow design patterns we learn when we look at the work done by others, or even to learn what not to do.

Those are just some of the numerous reasons a person might be interested to peek under the hood.

If anything, I'd guess OpenAI is going to clamp down this transparency in the future.

So this may end up being a final rare glimpse into how a tool like this works for those of us who want to understand how the sausage is made and learn from it.

Doesn't this ignore the possibility of emergent behavior?

We're just a bag of atoms bumping around, and yet we don't dismiss our intelligence.

Genuine question. Given that LLMs are supposed to allow us to rewrite anything, and I am an LLM believer, what I don't understand is: how does CUDA continue to be a moat in a world where LLMs can rewrite entire software development stacks? If NVIDIA is right about AI, isn't this same technology going to erode the software side of this same software moat?

Agree.

They are effectively arguing that AI will be God-like.

I don't mean here God in the religiously charged sense but in the philosophical sense.

A god is simply a person or thing that grants salvation.

Whether that's looking to a rain god to to solve a drought, a luck god to to solve a series of bad events, etc.

It doesn't matter how the god does it but the adherents trust that the god has the powers to do it.

In this case the idea is that the AI is going to be all-knowing and all-wise, and thus can lead mankind towards every manner of salvation.

It has a god-like flavor to it.

Went to a museum in Seattle. Can't remember the name of it. They explained that the salmon were so abundant in the Pacific Northwest during the early frontier period that they would catch them by the bucket full using water wheels and use the dead salmon to fertilize farms.

Humans have decimated Earth's abundance.

How do you know? I feel that it's just poorly edited.

In my experience, AI is easier to read than this was.

Why wouldn't the hyperscalers run these open models since they're much better than OpenAI and Anthropic at operating compute at scale?

I think the reason OpenAI and Anthropic stay ahead in revenues right now is because the models are improving too quickly to reliably compete with them on cost.

But, once model performance reaches a plateau -- they have to at some point, though perhaps years away -- that's when ability to operate compute infrastructure at scale becomes the secret sauce.

The big AI labs are likely safe until models stop improving fast enough to protect them from competition on cost.

This similar pattern has repeated in most technical booms prior to this.

When hard drive technology was improving fast enough that old hard drives were quickly obsolete, IBM could maintain good margins making hard drives. But once hard drives got good enough and advances were slow enough that innovation was not the only factor considered by drive purchasers, commodity hard drives started to take over and IBM had to exit those businesses.

The same is likely to happen once model improvement slows.

When the voice models start rambling, I think of C-3PO. When Uncle Owen told 3PO to shut up and 3PO said, "Shutting up, sir."

Or even some scenes where Data did something similar.

It's funny to now experience it.

Ok. This is the most interesting man in the world. Literally.

Is this inflation adjusted?

Is this inflation adjusted?

IBM's contributions to computing hardware and software are incalculable.

So many breakthroughs in hard drives, chips, transistor density, and other aspects of computing have come out of their labs.

Great to see them continuing to innovate.

But, yeah, usually they partner and license. Over the years, they've spun off more and more of their hardware businesses.

Just redo Slack already. :-)

I know this is much easier said than done. And my comment is partly tongue-in-cheek.

But Slack isn't great. It isn't loved.

I don't understand why Slack still doesn't have a true single inbox view of all activity.

And their LLM integration is poor, for what feels like one of the clearest use cases for a rich LLM chat experience -- to discuss what's happening in a channel, filter cruft, and ask an agent to take actions against MCP productivity tools like add a todo, etc.

Slack's current AI integrations are piss poor. Just summaries with zero customization. I mean, isn't it obvious that's not good enough?

Eventually a ground-up rethink of Slack in an LLM age is going to displace Slack.

They'll likely survive forever as an enterprise provider, like Microsoft Office and related tools, simply because of integrations, etc.

But Slack feels ripe for disruption.

Crossing my fingers that this boom jumpstarts 90's like improvements in computing hardware.

I feel like part of the reason for the relative stagnation in hardware over the last twenty years was simply the lack of use cases to justify hardware refreshes by businesses.

Most of the money and energy went to mobile for the last fifteen years.

Affordable local inference might be the gravy train the server, desktop, and laptop manufacturers need to get back in gear.