The public is against it for hypocritical reasons that they're not afraid to inflict on someone else. They're against the water and electricity use but they also angrily demand more semiconductor production that require building whole new reservoirs in Tainan, irrigation channels from the Han river, and coal plants in Anhui, as well as restarting Fukushima. Then when those companies come build plants in Arizona and New York, suddenly the reality of how the cow is butchered hits them and it stalls in permitting for years.
Tesla grew from two dudes making a sports car in their garage to being a decent EV company, despite many controversies. SpaceX is already propped up with government contracts to ship payloads to ISS. What could potentially justify 40% or so sustained growth of SpaceX? Will they create the asteroid mining industry from scratch (and make every precious metal on Earth worthless... hold on), or will they carry people to multiple planets in Solar System (so what, Mars will stay less habitable than Antarctica until the Sun blows up... hold on), or will they cover the whole world with Starlink satellites, data centers etc (which they are already doing a decent job... hold on)?
What's the secret sauce? What can Musk possibly promise this time around? More memes? He already smoked crack on YouTube, what comes next and why is this worthy of pension funds to invest into?
Well, the plugin developers can't really do anything about it.
And it's the one thing the LLM developers have been trying to fix for the last 2 years. Apparently, even at the cost of some other functionality. It's not like they can do it reliably.
I keep seeing this story but there are only a few data points that go along with it. The whole narrative of what AI will do to jobs seems to be agenda-based at this point. No one knows and it's way too early to tell. Everyone who is loud about it is trying to push their own agenda or obfuscate something else. Many companies are doing layoffs or becoming draconian with their employees in the name of AI but Ai is typically just an excuse to do what they wanted to do anyways.
I don't really believe in "organic foods" but I believe they sometimes are higher quality because their consumers expect more from them, although at a higher price. Just look at supermarket tomatos for example.
No this is still the level below needing a SCIF. The USG really tightened this stuff up in the 2010s and highly restricts what you can do with CUI. That's why there's a whole parallel FedRamp-compliant cloud ecosystem.
But in terms of how common it is, pretty much everybody in Fairfax County works in a company with rules like this; it's a big part of why the tech culture is so different than Austin or SFO.
The default assumption when evaluating any statement from Anthropic (or OpenAI, or anyone else) should always be that they are either trying to juice their IPO, create the conditions for regulatory capture, or both.
Ok i honestly was not aware opinionated titles were not allowed. sorry about. Why doesnt HN autopopulate the title in that case? Given this is a discusion site I lead with my point of view. Obviously the content behind the link is unchanged. Also I will note the original title is misleading according to some points of view since it implies the "ai exponential" is an established fact rather than an article of faith or a marketing narrative.
It wasn't that long ago that HN had a spirited discussion about how data centers in orbit could not possibly work. But it looks more and more like Musk is going to deliver.
Please please please bring it to the browser. I'm so done with the terrible ergonomics of everything at the was bounary having to pretend it's JavaScript
What I gather from this is that we're building super intelligence one subject at a time. We may never get true AGI but 30 years from now, or whatever number, it will certainly seem like it.
I think treating it as just a technology is right. Though there are a lot of things I like about Anthropic, what I don't like is how they scare themselves and hype up how dangerously powerful their models are. It feels so disingenuous even if they seem to actually believe it.
I also don't like how easily manipulated they are. They should have seen through Persona. They shouldn't have touched Persona with a 10 foot pole. Persona is not the answer to anything.
The unreasonably high price is because NASA is obligated by Congress to use Boeing and their SLS. It costs orders of magnitude greater than SpaceX for no benefit whatsoever, as a Falcon Heavy could absolutely be fitted for a lunar flyby if desired. Another problem is that rovers are way more limited than most people realize.
The fundamental problem is that moving parts break, so their design/behavior are very limited. For instance Curiosity's drill can only drill to about 6cm, and even then it broke after 16 limited activations. It then took a team of scientists around 2 years to come up with a partially effective workaround. A guy on the scene could have fixed it a few minutes, or done just as effective 'drilling' himself with a spoon. We're literally not even scratching the surface of what Mars has to offer.
Another issue is in mobility. That involves lots of moving parts. So Curiosity tends to move around at about 0.018 mph (0.03 km/h) meaning at its average speed it'd take about 2.5 days to travel a mile. But of course that's extremely risky since you really need to make sure you don't bump into a pebble or head into a low value area. So you want human feedback on a ~40 minute round trip total latency on a low bandwidth connection - while accounting for normal working hours on Earth. So in practice Curiosity has traveled a total of just a bit more than 1 mile per year. And as might be expected its tires have also broken. So it's contemporary travel time would be even worse.
Imagine trying to dig into all the secrets of Earth by traveling around at 1 mile per year, and once every few years (on average) being able to drill hopefully up to 6cm. And all of these things btw are bleeding edge relative to the past. The issue of moving parts break is just an unsolvable issue for now and for anytime in the foreseeable future.
Oh Lord yes. We have very specific communications channels we're allowed to use about any of our sensitive products, and that's only the unclassified stuff (classified is obviously its own, stricter, beast).
Well, as predicted I see many here complaining about how expensive Fable is. [0]
It is not just companies that know it is economically expensive, but it is also expensive to companies who have zero-data retention policies and they cannot offer AI features that use this model.
Anthropic doesn't care and won't talk to you unless you're paying them hundreds of millions. There are now local models which are great alternatives which have no quotas and can work with companies that have zero data retention policies.
Being put on a terror watch list doesn't mean you've assaulted an officer, it means they have reason to believe you're a risk of committing an act of terrorism, which is a reasonable concern for DHS agents. Assuming the man in the article isn't a literal terrorist, LARP'ing as a terrorist is dumb and it doesn't seem unreasonable that he'd be at risk of getting put on a watch list.
every action including scrolling roundtrips to the server
As soon as you include a network roundtrip in anything you're opening up a Pandora's box of slow connections, slow DNS queries, network outages, what-if-the-user-is-on-a-train problems, what-if-their-IP-changes-mid-flow problems, etc.
Reducing the network calls in any app has upsides and downsides. It isn't really true that SPAs are faster to render (as your example proves) but rendering speed isn't the only thing that matters.
After finishing the article, I am left with a much deeper suspicion of the felony murder rule, and of plea deals in general, than I am of giving minors the same sentences as adults.
That's not to say that I agree with giving minors adult sentences. But it doesn't seem the worst thing about the cases discussed here.
> Not to mention, in your world, gatekeeping the machines would instantly become the most profitable venture possible.
Yes, it would! That's why frontier labs don't open-source their models :)
The point is that the technology is already too democratized for anyone to hold onto it. Google had chatbot LLMs in 2019 and tried to keep them under wraps, how many years did that buy them?
> Do you really need the problem between chair and keyboard will be needed after another 10? And do you really think that in 20 years time that we will all be paid to prompt increasingly advanced and independent LLMs?
I think that things are going to get so much cheaper that we'll still be paid more than enough.
> The way automation is going, knowledge work will be automated first before any physical production processes are.
So far, LLMs are great and all, but they only really "fill in the blanks." That's a fundamental limitation of the entire concept of modelling in general; you cannot generalize to out-of-distribution inputs. The bottleneck is going to end up being human beings no matter which way you slice it. Because the bottleneck will be people, more and more of them will be hired, even though each individual is incredibly productive. This is also called Jevon's paradox, when making a resource less expensive leads to overall market growing.
> You are pretty much just describing some sort of fantasy automated communism.
If you went back a thousand years ago and told someone carrying a bucket full of water that one day pipes would run across the civilized world and water would literally be free basically everywhere, they might react the same way. If VLA-driven robots start reducing manufacturing prices, is it so unreasonable to slowly expect more and more things to go that direction?
