Agree but then the same argument applies to RDBMSs and multiple vendors seem to be doing OK in that space.
I think it ultimately comes down to "stuff" (sales journey, price, support etc.) other than the technology itself. I am sure any RDBMS can meet most of the requirements of any given customers (in most cases) but we still see customers buying across vendors.
So do Facebook, Faux News, Sky (and anffiliates in the continent) and any number of other right-wing media sources. Do we see federal or EU regulators going after them?
Sam and the board have realized the existing structure of OpenAI does not make them (Sam, board, investors) as wealthy as a for-profit structure would. This is the start of winding down OpenAI. I will not be surprised at all if Sam does what you have said and some members of the existing board invest.
One thing to add - we should not be comparing LLMs to experts in any field (where expertise can be objectively determined). We should be comparing LLMs to an average (in some cases better than average) layperson. The same level skepticism is warranted but it does not mean that they are not useful.
Unlike in certain Western countries where we have systems and processes in place to ensure that, I don't know, incompetent progeny do not become senior staffers in the White House.
Well - if the dollar being devalued is the whole story everything should go up by more or less the same %. This was clearly not the case.
Perhaps one could argue that the dollar being devalued triggered inflation but the quantum of it is a combination of mutliple factors - one (and probably the biggest) of which is supplier concentration and their pricing power.
Why shouldn’t the government have a say in what is taught to children? Children are not their parent’s property. These are future citizens and I would prefer that society has a say in what is taught to them. In a democratic system the government represents the will of the society.
It's the folks on the right who prevent any action more than hand-waving.
I think we have to realize that for folks on the right it is a matter of Identity and not Policy. At this point their opinion or concerns should be just ignored because - 1) Addressing them will not get their votes (as it is a matter of Identity for them. A positive Policy for them will not impact their decision who to vote for) 2) Addressing their concerns just delays the inevitable (the inevitable could be either a significant move to renewables or climate disaster)
> If someone is being paid more, this person has to work more
Why? Companies don’t pay more for more work. They will try to get away with the least they can pay. Workers should do the same.
What is “effectively” in this context? Is it the same level of efficiency (provided efficiency can be defined for the given type of work) as working in the office?
The company is trying to extract as much as possible for as little pay as possible. They obviously want workers to be as efficient as possible. However, I see no problem with workers pushing back against this and doing as little as possible for as much pay as possible. Why should the company be at the winning end of this tension? The state of the labor market over the last 4-5 decades has favored the company. Perhaps it is time it favored labor.
Funny. Anecdotally, my experience has been completely different. Progressively hotter summers and harsher winters. I guess that’s why we rely on accurately measured data.
The warnings are an admission from the “Great Minds and a great Thinkers” that someone other than them has created something previously thought impossible or, at the very least, several years / decades out. So, I am not sure ego is at play here.
Perhaps someone close to the problem (your actual scientists on the ground) is not capable / unwilling to accept the issues raised as that has direct (negative) impact on what they have created.
I am not sure most people think that far ahead. I think a lot of it comes down identity. People start identifying with "free market capitalism / freedom" (whatever that is) and then you try to rationalize their thinking / support / actions around that.
This is exactly what the elites are relying on. Complete lack of labor solidarity. Writer earning $260k (median for writers in Hollywood is probably far lower) and someone making $40k are both labor and need to be united against capital with resources to get its way with legislature and courts.
And should have pooled their allowances to purchase the house belonging to a SC justice’s mother. If you can’t even do that, do you really deserve a childhood?