1,424 karma · joined May 20, 2016
Curious how that goes, especially since Israels ulterior motives are always implied, they're not taken by their word.
And Islamists, who share their motives openly with anyone willing to listen are ignored.
Hilarious that you start with that as TAO requires
- Continuous adaptation makes it challenging to track performance changes and troubleshoot issues effectively.
- Advanced monitoring tools and sophisticated logging systems become essential to identify and address issues promptly.
- Adaptive models could inadvertently reinforce biases present in their initial training data or in ongoing feedback.
- Ethical oversight and regular audits are crucial to ensure fairness, transparency, and accountability.
Not much magic in there if it requires good old human oversight every step of the way, is there?
First, a vendor will have the best context on the inner workings and best practices of extending the current state of their software. The pressure on vendors to make this accessible and digestable to agents/ LLMs will increase, though.
Secondly, if you have coded with LLM assistance (not vibe coding), you will have experienced the limited ability of one shot stochastic approaches to build out well architected solutions that go beyond immediate functionality encapsulated in a prompt.
Thirdly, as the article mentions, opportunity cost will never make this a favorable term - unless the SaaS vendor was extorting prices before. The direct cost of mental overhead and time of an internal team member to hand-hold an agent/ write specs/ debug/ firefight some LLM assisted/ vibe coded solution will not outweigh the upside potential of expanding your core business unless you're a stagnant enterprise product on life support.
This statement is plainly wrong.
If you boost and praise AI usage, you have to face the real cost.
Can't have your cake and eat it, too.
Use an API Key and there's no problem.
They literally put that in plain words in the ToS.
For a senior tech writer?
Come on, man.
> Any of us who use these tools could make a mistake of this kind.
No, no not any of us.
And, as Benji will know himself, certainly not if accuracy is paramount.
Journalistic integrity - especially when quoting someone - is too valuable to be rooted in AI tools.
This is a big, big L for Ars and Benji.
If the marginal cost of writing code falls flat, the opportunities to plant exploits skyrocket.
Human attention is limited and things will fall through the inevitable cracks.
Will dependency upgrades become its own sandboxing ritual?
Apple is beholden to its stockholders, not its customers.
This is such poor execution on Apple's part.
The one difference between "can do" and "should be trusted to do" is the ability to systematically prove that "can do" holds up close to 100% of task instances and under adverserial conditions.
Hacking and pentesting are already scaling fully autonomously - and systematically.
For now, lower level targets aren't yet attractive as such scale requires sophisticated (state) actors, but that is going to change.
So building systems that white-hat prove your code is not only functional but competent are going to be critical not to be ripped apart by black-hat later on.
One nice example that applies this quite nicely is roborev [0] by the legendary Wes McKinney.
Most recent, FF, Chrome, Safari, all fail.
EDIT: And it works now. Must have been a transient issue.
Page seems inaccessible.
You seem much more pre-occupied with vague conspiracy theories about how bureaucrats work to the detriment of society than an actual topical discussion about medication or the article linked here.
Drugs (as used by you and colloquially as something to get high and negatively connotated with health outcomes) and medications are not the same thing.
Yet you pretend they are, without taking into account the contrasting realities of how medication is vetted and approved.
Nobody is trusting a overworked bureaucrat, because that's not how this works.
People far more qualified than you can imagine using standardized processes and thousands of people vet medication before it becomes available to the public.
Ritalin hs been around for decades.
I am all for informing the public and empowering people to make autonomous decisions for their health.
I am against people playing moral superiority when actually all they're doing is spouting non-scientific conspiracy theories about some bad bureacurats following an evil plan drugging the populace.
So what does this run on then?
No docs, it's not possible to find any deployment guides for Ray using serverless solutions like Lambda, Cloud Functions or be it your own Firecracker.
Instead, every other post mentions EKS or EC2.
The Ray team even rejected Lambda support expressedly as far back as 2020 [0]. Uuuuuugh.
No thanks! shiver
I'd rather cut complexity for practically the same benefit and either do it single machine or have a thin, manageable layer on top a truly serverless infra like in this talk [1] " Processing Trillions of Records at Okta with Mini Serverless Databases".
And, given we're here on HN, have we thrown words like "moat" and "risk" around?
If OpenAI is incapable of building anything that can't be easily copied by a third party, what's their justification for existing?
Surely not money, because why else would they be raising again and again and again to plug their cash outflow?
This time for real!
Trust me, bro!"
This is most certainly not AI.
Billionaires and enterprises want to see consumers spending to return their investment.
The presence of other - dispersed - illegal material doesn’t diminish said returns too much, this central dump would have set precedent and had garnered massive attention.
This is the capitalist way.