sifar

This has overflow issues unlike xor.

The paradox is that the quality of AI output is directly proportional to your expertise and understanding, while the trust/belief/confidence in their effectiveness is inversely proportional.

It will still pay to develop the core understanding. It is just that the world can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent :).

In general and for software in particular too :). For general see my response to ellg.

Even though we were aware of the insecurity of the supply chain, 1) In practice we tend to ignore it except for mission critical cases. We still do. 2) Autonomous vulnerability/exploitation at scale was difficult and reserved for high value targets.

What you said will be accelerated by 2) now.

To clarify, I meant it from a lay person's perspective. I do realize that one can argue if the average person will have developed this awareness now. The difference this time, I feel, is that the genAI tools are widely available for normal people to experiment with which will hopefully help develop this visceral feeling.

Yes, that is my main takeaway to. Adn that is why all the talk about AI alignment/safety seem pointless to me.

I get amused that people don't realize that genAI is an existential threat to the internet and everything that has been built on it.

1) One can no longer trust things out on the web. 2) One no longer needs things out on the web.

For 1), I hope the defense mechanism kicks in time to bake security into our computing culture and pervades throughout the stack.

Thou shall not make a machine in the likeness of man. Oh wait that is Dune :).

I think what OP meant is Asimov's stories revolve around issues arising from loopholes or some interpretation of the three laws of robotics.

>> I'm not sure what level of delusion one has to run to look at human civilization and say "no, intelligence wasn't important for this".

One has to only look at the current tech and political leaders.

would opus 4.6 be relevant in 2035 ?

bookmark

Upton Sinclair[1] has something relevant for Amodei.

Funnily enough, the same thing can be used against those who criticize his view on AI. I wonder if there is a word for this.

[1] https://quoteinvestigator.com/2017/11/30/salary/

I felt it more being naive idealism in the beginning coupled with the thrill of achieving things before the realization. Yet certain things stand out like her trip to Myanmar. Why to subject oneself through that in that condition.

The title is very apt, the executives, they simply didn't care. That was a fascinating glimpse

>> I trust they understand the market and SpaceX's current value

It is more likely that the parties involved know that they can create/manipulate conditions to make it a success.

>> The whole history of computing has been about creating higher abstractions to make it easier to build software

These abstractions are understandable and predictable. There is no mental model for the current LLMs(in entirety, even though the parts are known), the output might as well come from a genie.

It's called fables.

Yes, the US seems to be fighting the last war - both strategically and tactically.

Flip it around. Can intelligence exist without self preservation ?

Right. Technology is more distributed, empowering for the individual, however the power that wields it is stuck in a more feudalistic mindset and so we get this weird state where technological advancements seem more dystopian.

I look at it from the other side. Life, and by extension human civilization,is a local entropy minimization mechanism.

No, not bombadil. I'll donate mine too. :)

Do you ? It takes a some introspection. People can be in denial despite the feedback from reality.

Yeah, the latency numbers provide a ceiling for your algorithm. The actual performance depends on the implementation, code generation, runtime hazards, small dependencies one may have overlooked etc.

The corruption of LoTR is the saddest part here.

It is not a binary choice. This is the greatest illusion people in power manage to create, there are only two choices - pro or anti.

Ironic that for someone so steeped in tech, his views on technology seem to be simplistic.

You are building a system that has a shaky mental model and which may or may not adhere to the *.md files.

What is your position? Genuinely asking as someone who is similarly trying to cope and doesn't want to travel down the road being trampled on. Primarily because it doesn't make me better, it doesn't benefit me as an individual and takes the joy out from understanding things.

The point is worrying about results creates anxiety that takes away your focus from doing the job which results is lower performance -> subpar results - it is a recursive spiral. Also results are not "wholly" under our control. Hence avoid worrying about the results "while" doing it.

The final result of any action depends on a lot of external factors for e.g. one might develop a product, but whether it succeeds or not depends on other players, economy, luck and host of other factors that one does not control or know. This feeds into the first point about not worrying about the results.

> AI in particular doesn't have a high requirement at the consumer side

Effective use of these AI tools need high critical thinking skills which are in short supply.

There is a distinct possibility that the credit expansion for the datacenter buildout will turn the AI bubble into a 2008 like situation. That would be painful.