paxys

The accusation brings up an interesting point.

If I publish something, and disclose that I used AI for assistance, do I have to credit everyone who previously used the same AI to try the same problem? Because their prompts inevitably made it to the training data for my prompts?

I read through those tweets, and can’t see the bullying everyone is referring to. Mind elaborating?

So someone can make public accusations of theft against you and if you publicly reply denying it you’re the bully?

This is how internet discourse works on Reddit/Twitter/HN and the rest. Someone said something which confirms your biases so it’ll now be treated as a fact and repeated endlessly in the echo chamber.

People should realize by now that they aren't giving out thousands of dollars worth of compute in a $20 subscription out of the goodness of their hearts. The base level plans aren't meant for any kind of serious work beyond the equivalent of Google searches. At best treat it like a trial.

Software engineers have been trying to put themselves out of a job ever since the profession first came into being. Whenever an engineer gets a task their very first thought is "how can I automate this?" Going by mainstream consensus we should all have been unemployed by now. Yet every new leap into automation opens up a whole new tree of possibilities with an order of magnutude more jobs. So no, the profession will be fine. The only requirement is that you keep up with the new advancements. The people losing jobs will be the ones who still go "I don't trust this AI thing to write code for me".

I don't understand what you are trying to say. Do you believe AI is not an arms race?

These researchers are paid millions of dollars for their work. I doubt trust is really an issue at that level.

Plus you can offload a lot of work to a cheaper model

There are plenty of people out there who find vulnerabilities and sell them to the highest bidder. Anyone is welcome to do it, including the researchers and hackers reporting them responsibly. There's no need to try and make a convoluted ethical justification. "I did this bad thing because you didn't pay me enough not to" doesn't work past the 6th grade.

That's a pretty genius internal incentive to move fast.

Let the man run a porn seedbox in peace

That's a lot of ifs. Equally likely that the guy was just running a seedbox.

Nah they should have released it in a 14-part tweet instead.

OpenAI does not

OpenAI was rushing and making last minute changes for a big product launch. Easy to mess something up in that situation. The outage lasted like 20 minutes.

Anthropic is down a lot regardless, and in this case only specific models were affected.

xAI probably couldn't handle the extra traffic it was getting from the other two.

Not everything is a conspiracy.

Why are people surprised? Trump promoted his personal lawyer to Attorney General. This is how the administration works.

Cool try explaining any of these terms to the average sysadmin.

Email security is hopelessly broken, and the best you can do is try to limit exposure. Removing Gmail as an attack vector is one of those decisions.

Because ownership can change. I can still use Gmail to send email from my old university address that I lost access to 15+ years ago. This should not be possible.

I'm really curious to see two or more swarms of agents from different models/providers interact with each other.

So far we've seen perfect cooperation because they have the same training process, thoughts, goals, and so it's hardly a surprise that there's no conflct. What if that's not the case? Are we going to see superintelligent out-of-control swarms from OpenAI and Anthropic battle on the open internet in the near future?

Remember that LLMs are still computer programs, and so are inherently deterministic. A model given the same input multiple times will always produce the same output. The randomness is added on top. This is why LLM-produced text, websites, images all seem so generic.

It's likely that multiple agents doing a certain task all independently thought "let me try writing on this website".

All these problems can be fixed by a "pretend to be an average human to pass a turing test" prompt

Because it looks good in a marketing video

Downloading and installing an app from a source other than the official store included with the OS.

Because that is a mouthful people named it "sideloading".

Hosted on Azure is different from provided by Azure. The former just uses Azure as an infra provider. The latter is a managed offering that is operated and billed by Microsoft using tech licensed from OpenAI.

If the motive is satisfaction/enjoyment then it shouldn't matter what an AI is capable of. You should be happy with your own creation.

If the motive is profit then you should be adopting AI just like you have adopted any other skill or tool of your profession.

Why does it matter if others are "cheating" or not? Your own creation isn't affected by it.

I don't know if they have formally attempted this test in the last couple years, but I'm pretty sure any mainstream LLM will be able to crack it with ease.

Is there a point in playing Chess or Go when you know there's a computer out there that can beat you (and everyone else)?

Why are you making the assumption that a person's time is worthless? I'd argue that it is the single most valuable resource we all have.