I am sure a lot of folks tested it but the ai says Biden won the 2020 elections, they did not try to change that or add any qualifiers to the answer like all of the government officials nominated answered with.
What does a full integration of claude or openAI models into the phone even mean? What additional functionality can one get and what are those use cases? Does it actually pull in more users to the voice/Siri interface? I mean even with vastly superior models, does it move the needle enough to attract more users?
Why is OpenAI getting away with this crap? They are clearly failing to control their code. If someone did this pre-AI or even ran the exact same set up as openAI did and hacked another site, they would be in jail. OpenAI is not even issuing an apology, they are happily blaming AI and weirdly using this to tout their progress even.
How is this expected to work? How is meta going to get access to my data on a phone? Did they build all the integrations needed for every app? This doesn’t look good for privacy, I don’t trust meta at all.
I watched it around the time it released or may be on dvd. I remember thinking the premise is great but the situations are way too exaggerated for comedy and in some ways the movie tries too hard for laughs. Looking back and comparing with today, I would say he did not exaggerate it enough!! To start, he said the country devolves in 500 years, hardly took 20.
This one doesn’t mention tourist visas, so I am guessing they will be issued? I don’t get what benefit they see by inconveniencing and potentially harming folks that are already in the country legally to just live their lives. I get that this administration’s goal is to completely shut down all immigration and potentially even remove folks here legally too but there will be a cost to bear for the country because of that. It will be slow to come and so they will be able to blame it on the next administration
What does this mean in the larger landscape though? Every company is using AI or trying it out, are they not using the cloud services for it? If so is it still not a big enough pie to show?
Yes I wasn’t questioning that the market and government is controlled by the AI companies. What I am saying is that cannot be a moat. If anything it will be an anchor that will pull these companies down. If anything that is a signal that they don’t have a moat
Sorry this is not true at all. O
Those are just corrupt, incompetent practices by an idiot who is drunk on power. It has nothing to do with AI. This is not an answer at all. You tried to shove a square peg into a round hole for what reason. I don’t know
With these models, what is the moat? Is it the architecture itself or the training data? Why can’t China create these models themselves? It just feels like theater to restrict models. Can someone tell me why I am wrong if I am?
How much research is a startup expected to do? Isn’t the point of a startup to accelerate productizing research? Unless they are multi billion dollar “startups” do we even expect any research out of them?
The bigger question for me is , at what point does investing in higher capability general models will stop showing the ROI?
For example - What percentage of workflows require this new highly capable model? How much of it can be replaced with the software tooling around it? What I mean is if the software tooling can optimize the query over a few iterations does it get the same output as from a single shot high capability model query?
I have over the last two months switched to OpenAI from Claude since it’s been vastly better for my cases. Wonder if I see any difference in the quality of the output with this change
The move the current companies are missing is to have a legislation declaring ai as a person. Just like how corporations are people, if ai is a person then they don’t have to show number of people fired, can argues content creation and engagement is through the roof and so many other possibilities. /s
I am sure this is great but it requires some depth in that field to appreciate this. I don’t understand if what they developed is a tech to do a live scan of any person or just a detailed map of one brain.
I respect cynicism and questioning stuff but this is misplaced. You have to trust the government since they are potentially the least partisan source here. Yes the data can be misconstrued by legislators but the truth of the data cannot be in question. It’s healthy to question it but the solution is to require proof of non-sabotage. It takes a lot of money and resources to pull this data together. It’s compiled by organizations across the world and being the trustworthy anchor is the most efficient way to achieve this. With that the government agency has every incentive to be non partisan and operate with integrity.
I don’t know if the circular financing is a problem. NVIDIA is the best my name in town, any company has to spend on NVIDIA assets for their compute. Now that makes NVIDIA rich and so they don’t know what to do with their money. They are just propping up companies they find interesting
This is alarming. Very soon there will be no point driving because insurance is going to jump in and mandate strict rules around how to sit, hold the steering wheel and how I should be looking and the fun of driving will be gone. This is all converging towards autonomous driving without a steering wheel.
I don’t understand the argument here. The article doesn’t describe a collapse or the breadcrumbs for it. The only argument I can put together is companies hosting the open source models in house or use some service like Amazon that could potentially host them and so replace the frontier models. Data center and specifically infra to host llms is still the main sticking point given the security concerns about data going to china. The article doesn’t make these arguments coherently
Another thing I noticed is the llms perform efficiently/effectively only under the optimum circumstances. May be this just a Claude issue, but when the session goes on for very long the effectiveness drops drastically and I start getting bad answers. This is especially true for design and debugging. Wonder how that ladders up to the token usage
This is not a new realization, it’s known. By definition llms are great summarizers not inventors. The value is in having the knowledge readily accessible and to cross check and validate against what’s already known - a huge time saver. It’s not going to come with anything new. It need not even, the value is in making things time efficient.
Of course the llm companies justifying huge investments want to frame it as a technology to invent new things and that is where the disconnect is. They are over indexing on the promise but companies are figuring out that the value is in automation and applying/showing value for existing workflows. Claude focused on this aspect and hence so successful
8k is cheap if laundry is fully offloaded but will a regular consumer spend 8k on a device that is not proven? I guess there is a subset of consumers that this automatically targets/caters to.