Thanks for the link, it just served to reinforce my view that EU is anti-innovation. These points can’t be read any other way. They will put EU at a disadvantage in AI development.
“With this move, Iowa joins five states that have removed the legally mandated relationship between physician assistants and doctors, according to the American Academy of Physician Associates.”
Sundar should be fired. Google has blown its lead in AI research by being too hesitant to release products, while search quality has continued to decline. Bard is poor compared to ChatGPT 3.5, let alone GPT-4.
Scott Aaronson's thinking is heavily influenced by the Holocaust, which has led him to some debatable conclusions. Nonetheless, his writings are worth reading.
Yes. They’ve explicitly downranked criticism (they posted about it on Twitter maybe a year ago) and with the removal of downvotes, it’s much harder to quickly figure out how good is the video.
A script kiddie can connect GPT3.5 through its API to generate a bunch of possible exploits or other hacker scripts and auto execute them. Or with a TTS API and create plausible sounding personalized scripts that spam call or email people. And so on - I’m actually purposefully not mentioning other scenarios that I think would be more insidious. You don’t need much technical skills to do that.
Not all good books have to be high literature about well-developed characters going on emotional journeys and learning about themselves or whatever. We can use books about thought-provoking big ideas with some twists thrown in.
Sorry, I can’t ever write clearly on the phone, this site is very mobile-unfriendly. I meant that defendants would be able to talk to the AI about their case to learn as much as they want. A public defender can’t commit that much time to each of their cases.
If poor people can only get the bot, that means the Constitution was changed. I don’t see how that could be the tech’s fault. It’s more likely that the AI would free up public defenders from things like having to answer their clients’ questions, as they could just ask the AI, allowing them to be more effective.
I mean, if the AI app is better than public defenders, it’s still progress. Rich people can already afford experts, so the inequality would be lessened.
You’re making unsupported assertions. It is unclear how dose-dependent the therapeutic effects are. I definitely haven’t seen anything to suggest that microdoses can work as well as larger doses.