I personally liked it a lot (although I don't think it's "great" either), because I find it very funny to see cartoon characters in roles that are far from their canon. I've even found moving the scene where Wiley shows the value of persistence.
6,710 karma · joined June 12, 2013
AI is an exception. We're already losing understanding (although we never fully had it in the first place), and we're losing control (see jailbreaks/hacks etc.).
We're still far from the doomsday scenario because AI 1. is not developed enough yet, 2. can't really replicate itself, and 3. has very limited means to act.
But: 1. its intelligence is developing quickly, 2. hardware capable of "hosting" it is slowly being developed, and 3. it will likely gain access to increasingly powerful means of acting in the physical world (this is already happening in the digital world).
Once AI becomes intelligent enough (it doesn't strictly need to be AGI), has the substrate on which to exist, and has more means to act, we'll essentially have a new species on Earth - one more capable than humans and potentially determined to kill humans at some point.
And for those who believe airgapping is a valid safety measure: read https://xkcd.com/538. AI will be able to threaten and manipulate people.
Because this device has 80 GB, which allows running larger models (which is the whole point of the device).
AFAIK, the next significant step in terms of quality above 32 GB is 256 GB, but 80 GB still buys convenience.
> A MacBook Pro already has excellent ability to run local LLMs, so why wouldn't someone just spend that $1,999 on maxing out their MacBook specs (M5 Max with extra RAM) instead?
80 GB extra (48 → 128) cost as much as this device, but the base MBP is very expensive already (4000+$). This device is essentially a "cheap" addon for an existing system.
> We aim to safely build an automated AI researcher that can work under human supervision to further progress on deep learning and alignment, enabling iterative improvements [...] By "research intern", we mean a system that can carry out well-defined research tasks under human direction, including tasks that would take a skilled researcher a few days.
AI 2027:
> OpenBrain continues to deploy the iteratively improving Agent-1 internally for AI R&D
> With Agent-1's help, OpenBrain is now post-training Agent-2
> With the help of thousands of Agent-2 automated researchers, OpenBrain is making major algorithmic advances
A model doesn't really "understand" neuralese, in the same way that the human brain doesn't intuitively understand the low level processes that compose a thought.
Even if we could trace all the electrical and chemical activity behind a human thought, we (likely) couldn't directly translate that activity into its meaning, because internal representations don't map neatly to intuitive concepts. There (usually) isn't a single neuron for "apple" and another for "eating" so that connecting the two forms the thought "eating an apple".
Having said that, there have been experiments on LLM that have managed to identify and even modify internal representations. However, these methods are still computationally expensive and limited.
> Models can omit key information in their visible thoughts, as this Anthropic 2025 paper shows. We are also worried about steganography
I think the analogy with the human brain is very fitting. If we train somebody to perform an action, they'll be able to do it, but we can't know for certain whether they internally agree with it or not.
No, this is a big misconception, and part of the cargo cult.
Use cases like the parent's are essentially about having a local LLM handle the leftover tasks. By that point, a lot of bits (main/big tasks) have already left home anyway.
The maths don't check. With Deepseek Flash one goes a very long way with 1600$ - even 10$/month, for easy jobs, are more than 13 years, and at a higher quality.
- translations: cloud providers can bowdlerize (censor) bad words/content; also, if you want to do a translation for personal use of copyrighted materials, cloud providers may block it
- image generation: generating drawings with a style that even just resembles a copyrighted one (ie. Disney) may be blocked by cloud providers - for example, generating old cartoons style with GPT may not be possible.
That's marketing spin indeed (or lies, if you prefer).
That's exactly the situation with the iPad Pro, with the exception that Microsoft didn't castrate it. I've had one and used it for professional development; it's not very ergonomic when used on your lap (but still usable), so it's not to everyone's liking. Still, I'd use a modern one if it were 100% Linux-compatible, and wouldn't miss anything.
> Does a SteamDeck become a laptop if you install Windows on it?
Whether a laptop requires a hinge to be defined as such can b matter of personal preference. For me (and, again, for Apple), it's not a requirement. 7 inches is a dealbreaker for me, although I think Stallman used a 7-inch laptop.
1. WSL is effectively Linux. 2. Most importantly, Linux support is mediocre at best (I owned 10+ laptops) - for developers who don't want to pull their hair on hardware incompatibilities, or want to be bound to a small part of the laptops/desktop parts, it's either that, or a Windows-only machine.
Fun (in a sad way) stuff: even the Ubuntu certification is a joke - Canonical is allowed to use customized versions of Ubuntu that they aren't required to release to the public; as a consequence, even hardware certified by Canonical as Ubuntu-compatible, can effectively be incompatible. I've been bitten by this twice.
If they just decided to invest, say, 20% more on quality, they'd have very competitive products - but they just don't.
There's actually a very simple answer to that! A laptop is a mobile device with the set of functionalities that macOS has, but iPadOS hasn't :)
I wish this was ironic (I'd love to use the iPad Pro as laptop), but it isn't.
There are a few problems though, primarily, a GPU with lots of VRAM and very high bandwidth is inherently very expensive (on top of which there is also the CUDA premium); AI use cases are better served by SoCs with lower (but still high) bandwidth and more RAM.
Using the published bandwidths, the math is 170 * 1 and 153 * 8.
If an implementation is "a black box that works," absolutely, LLMs are fine. They can create complex programs in full.
But if one expects a tight implementation... it's a horror. LLMs vastly overengineer code (I believe they're intentionally designed to do so). I really struggle to make LLMs generate lean code.
In the best case, they generate bloated designs (in terms of complexity, not necessarily performance), but in the worst case, they generate gaps in the specification. And even in the first case - cognitive load is a problem also for LLMs, not just for humans (although obviously at a larger scale).
I think LLMs are essentially modern compilers, with similar problems, but designed more like "deoptimizing compilers" than optimizing ones. :)
If you're experiencing a bug that pegs you're CPU, fair enough. But RustDesk is video-stream based (in many formats), while TightVNC is image(-region) based. This is actually similar to why you watch movies in, say, H.264 rather than Motion JPEG¹.
¹=similar, not same.
If a package doesn't have particular build requirements, setting up a PPA is overall simpler than hosting a personal repo (I do both).
There are Canonical PPAs for that, which make distribution much simpler (it's still not as simple as it could, but with AI's help it's simple).
- Meta is commissioning or sponsoring rage-bait
- Controversial creators are earning money through Facebook's content monetization program
The title is ambiguous (at first, I thought it was the first case), and that's where the clickbait lies.
No doubt that also the second case is a serious problem, but that's orthogonal to the ambiguity of the title.
For those who also lived in southern countries, what I mean with "rigid" and "humorless" (among the other things) will sound very familiar. I've talked about this topic recently with a few friends from southern cultures, and they also shared the fact that (among the other things) expressing themselves the same way they did in their own culture, would be considered crass/inappropriate (to say the least), and in some contexts even abusive (happened to me).
Sibling poster highlighted how culture can be intended "in the sense of "expected norms and behaviors"; that's also part of it.
When I personally want tight code, I have to spend a considerable amount of time adjusting it manually:
- It needs to be trimmed down. In my experience, at least one agent I use struggles to produce minimalist designs, and it's very frustrating
- I need to consider whether there are solutions based on higher-level assumptions, that AIs typically miss
- I need to check whether there are off-the-shelf solutions - AIs like to reinvent the wheel
IMO, software production has become a mass-produced commodity in every sense - it's much more expensive to produce software manually, but the quality is not the same.
> All we see out of mainstream AAA gaming is abused devs, private equity scalping, and mindless remaster regurgitation. Basically going through the same problems as Hollywood is with major films. You get a massive banger of a production every few years, and the rest is just endless money burning and developer harm.
The production ethics and the product are two distinct aspects.
Regarding the product itself, definitely the AAA gaming industry is, like Hollywood, a dysfunctional production model, but that doesn't mean that it's dead in terms of quality - some franchises do maintain high quality (Doom has been exceptional in this sense) but even in terms of new IP, in average, there at least couple of high quality entries in average, every year. Things could go better, but they're certainly far from "dead".