mellosouls

1. They had feet in avant-garde and early adopter camps.

2. They had a popular impact that has arguably never been matched (I include eg. Sinatra, Elvis, MJ and Madonna etc) which lifted the normal "populariser" contribution to your cultural shift.

So there are other huge bands or artists in the progressive, influential respect, people like eg. James Brown, Nirvana, Kraftwerk, NWA etc etc and lots of influential but not commercially successful or mainstream acts.

The Beatles though were arguably more progressive than even those, and on a completely different level in terms of cultural reach. That's what makes them special.

Btw they're not really a band I listen to much, in case there are any "you're just a fanboy" suspicions motivating counters to this. :)

Basically same move as Github Copilot a few months back when their golden rates ended.

They just refunded pro rata if you wanted out from the annual contract which they'd changed the terms on drastically, presumably OpenAI will offer the same to existing subscribers.

A shame that Tibo feels the need to BS like this. I predict another "we heard you...we handled comms badly...here's some resets" style post in a few days.

No it doesn't - there's nothing in the article about asking for feedback in return. The only reference to somebody actually doing that is extremely negative.

If the author reads this, they may be well-motivated but should consider quite seriously that they are not understanding "two-way" as they intend.

Those people you name are important only to the very recent micro-culture being discussed, not "AI".

Of all the names somebody interested in the subject would actually associate with the development of AI over the last century, those would be footnotes only.

I think that's part of the problem and why its seen as cultish, the obsession with the social over the scientific, and a lack of historical perspective.

I think he is trying to say that the fewer things we need to tune the better, but if so that's trivially Occam's razor and a standard part of the scientific toolkit.

Perhaps similar to somebody more famous like Harari in that respect.

The author appears to be legitimate in his scientific background but the repeated implications of the revolutionary nature of his work are somewhat crankish; this is a personal blog so possibly he just needs a good editor (he says he is published elsewhere).

Just something to bear in mind as you read - not that there isn't anything to gain from it; but the boundary between well-grounded theory and speculative philosophic beliefs may not be clear - which to be fair arguably comes somewhat with the territory here.

In the UK we watched it on the Beeb when it was aired.

From X:

https://x.com/DKokotajlo/status/2099600298855829616

When you read the detail the compute they are throwing at it is incredible, tens of thousands of agents with different groups competing.

It's not like a single Gauss as you imply, "just" many, many mathematicians working tirelessly in a completely ego-less way, guided by other agents and ultimately humans, built - allegedly - on recent human insights.

Stunning, undoubtedly, but this is a "brilliant autistic herd" result, not that of a singular mind.

Obviously its an impressive human intellectual feat but the hubris is instructive perhaps for our wider interactions with AI as its abilities accelerate around us.

https://x.com/QwenDevs/status/2095157452904018263

Short example (I don't know if she's using pi/strudel/whatever here but you get the idea):

https://youtube.com/shorts/pKs7NehiszY

If not, please just link the repo and its own title, no need for hype.

https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/nvidia-avo-reaches-100-on-...

There you will find the extremely important qualifier it's the public set, not the private set (with the risk of overfitting, ie the results not repeating when submitted to be run in competition), and the detail that this is essentially a harness added to Opus 5, not Nvidia's own models.

Obviously still impressive, you would think.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22034221

I was very anti it then - it was clearly Consultancy BS; but now non-devs really do have much more scope to create things that were only possible by software engineers before - and yes that creates challenges for us professionals.

But I no longer sneer at "The Citizen Developer" as an idea; its time has come.

You can probably get away with that in most cases with on-street parking with a mix of commercial chargers and work if you're lucky.

That "probably" is the point. Your average normal car user (especially in financially challenged times) fighting for a car space on their street is not motivated to take on that higher risk at higher cost in a less competitive market to keep the equivalent of HN demographics happy.

That's still leaves millions (?) of households with on street parking.

Most commuters outside cities get on quite ok with normal cars - because they have to - and a third of them is hardly "niche".

Different to cities in that there isn't remotely the public transport infrastructure to support getting rid of cars, or the private facility to support electric overnight charging for the longer distance car-commuting etc that isn't generally needed if you live in cities.

Things are improving with technological advance but - again - not everybody can afford those advances and the latest models.

It's a completely different lifestyle living in those sorts of places in some respects.

Yeah that seems to be the general problem here. Electric car champions and city dwellers living in a bubble.

We don't all live in the city.

No, I'd rather straight talk clear of idealism about being a corporate cog. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

Who writes this cringe-worthy crap? Or is it an American cultural thing?

This is just ultimately a commercial company churning out digital widgets so I hope they are paying "Hell Yeah!" money...