That “unacceptable and insensitive” comment was, in reality, an entirely reasonable take on how Charlie Kirk directly stoked the fires that ended up taking his life. They’re sending a clear message that you are not allowed to speak honestly about any of the context surrounding the event, and can only share an opinion if it shows Kirk in a positive light, since apparently neutral or worse is not allowed.
For most software, iteration starts getting diminishing returns only if it’s approaching feature completeness and no bugs. LLMs are plateauing well before they became super genius job stealers like they were supposed to, and it’s going to take a major breakthrough to see any significant improvement.
Those images in the mirror are already perfect replicas of us, we need to be ready for when they figure out how to move on their own and get out from behind the glass or we’ll really be screwed. If you give my “”“non-profit”“” a trillion dollars we’ll get right to work on the research into creating more capable mirror monsters so that we can control them instead.
Fan art is generally protected because of a rule called “fair use”, which allows people to use copyrighted work without permission. For example, if you briefly quote a book, the author won’t have success if they go after you for copying from their book, even though you clearly did. Generally speaking, a person making fan art and not selling it is going to be protected under fair use. The law wants creators to have control of the thing they created, but we all live in a shared culture and we all deserve to participate in the art we experience, so there’s some wiggle room, and this has been the case long before AI was a thing.
What these AI companies are doing, on the other hand… well, it hasn’t really been tested in court yet, but they’re doing a lot more than single images or brief quotes, and they’re doing it for money, so they’ll likely have some work to do.
Ugh, I’m devastated, I was so sure that math was gay but this is making me question everything
There isn’t a simple evolutionary definition of “fish”, not the same way there is for, say, mammals. If you found the common ancestor of everything we call a mammal and said “everything descended from this one is also a mammal”, you’d be correct. If you did that for everything we call fish, every animal in the world would be a fish. Also, we decided which animals were fish mostly on vibes, so without a clear definition you can pedantically argue that everything is a fish including mammals.
I would guess it’s web requests made during a chat session, e.g. the user asks about kayaks and the AI searches and fetches some pages to put into its context before answering. That’s not really scraping, it’s data being used in the moment in response to a user request, closer to what a “user agent” has always meant in the web world. A crawler would be crawling the site, systematically trying to follow every link and collect what’s there with little to no human involvement.
If nothing else, it seems reasonable to assume that a computer could run a program that does all the important things 1 neuron does, so from there it’s “just” a matter of scaling to human brain quantities of neurons and recreating enough of the training that evolution and childhood provide to humans. But that’s the insanely inefficient way to do it, like trying to invent a clockwork ox to pull your plow instead of a tractor. It’d be pretty surprising if we couldn’t find the tractor version of artificial intelligence before getting an actual digital brain patterned directly off of biology to do it.
It’s making mistakes and failing to think abstractly at levels previously only achieved by humans, so it’s only rational to expect it to take over the world in 5 years
That’s a decently rational response you’ve described, though. If you were really at immediate risk, you’d probably know it, especially with an alarm going off to get you looking for signs of danger. And it’s usually better to have a lazy, skeptical evacuation than a panicked stampede. Schools do fire drills to check the alarms, sure, but it’s also important to make them a routine thing that all the kids know how to handle.
The tokenization is a low-level implementation detail, it shouldn’t affect an LLM’s ability to do basic reasoning. We don’t do arithmetic by counting how many neurons we can feel firing in our brain, we have higher level concepts of numbers, and LLMs are supposed to have something similar. Plus, in the “”“thinking”“” models, you’ll see them break up words into individual letters or even write them out in a numbered list, which should break the tokens up into individual letters as well.
I am deeply troubled by the way that AIs slip right past peoples’ defenses and convince them of things that are absolutely not true. Not just things like the AI psychosis that some people have been driven into, not just the hallucinations or overly fawning over terrible ideas, it goes so much further than our monkey brains can understand. These things do not think, they do not have feelings, they don’t have motivations, they don’t have morals or values, no sense of right or wrong, they are, quite literally, word prediction machines that are selecting their responses semi-randomly. And yet, even people who know this to be the case cannot stop themselves from anthropomorphizing the AI. All of our human instincts scream “this is a person!” when we interact with them, and with that comes an assumption of values, morals, thoughts, and feelings, none of which are there. There is a fundamental mismatch between the human mental model and the reality of the software, and that is harmful, even dangerous. We will give benefit of the doubt to them, we will believe their explanations about “why” they “chose” to say or do what they did, and we will repeatedly make the same fundamental mistakes because we want to believe a total lie.
And that’s not even getting in to the harm when they are working properly, encouraging us to outsource our thinking and creativity to a service that charges monthly. I’m seriously worried that kids in school now are going to have their learning stunted terribly, it’s just so easy to have any and all homework done in a matter of minutes without learning a single thing.
“Superintelligence is intelligence beyond the sum of all humans,” he wrote in a LinkedIn post Thursday. “It is reasonable to predict that we are going to have specialized AI savants in every field within five years.”
That is insane. I can’t even get one of these things to tell me “no, that API doesn’t exist”, it always makes one up that would be perfect for what I need if it existed, then apologizes profusely when I tell it it was wrong. It can’t write any original or novel code, just boilerplate that matches what it has seen before. What’s going to change in 5 years to suddenly give it creativity and a sense of self-awareness of its own knowledge?
The squabbling process moves the law toward meeting the needs of more people. If a dictator just gets to decide what the law is, they’ll likely be self-serving to the dictator, or even outright harmful to entire categories of people.
I only have so many minutes to spend on this plane of existence, so if I look through something and decide “this isn’t enough to go anywhere”, then no, I’m not going to spend more time on it. I’d be happy to be wrong and see Trump and his cronies get brought down by a ragtag group of statisticians who found the truth and didn’t give up until justice was served, but I really don’t think that’ll happen.
… did you read the update to that last link? Kinda undermined quite a bit of this.
I’m open to the idea that a conspiracy happened. We know they aren’t above things like sending an alternate slate of electoral votes and then hoping to override the legitimate results in Congress, because that absolutely did happen. But stealing seven separate elections in all the swing states is a hell of a tough job, and harder to do it without being caught for months. If it did happen, there’d be more evidence than just statistical anomalies within the official results. You’d see people recorded as voting who say they never did, you’d see exit polls that don’t make sense, you’d see an audit reveal missing paper ballots, there’d be something more. And even if it was the perfect crime, you’ll need to find a flaw to actually get anything done about it anyway. There isn’t enough here to say it happened. There’s enough to look into some suspicious stuff in a few places, and go ahead and check those out, but don’t get your hopes up or say that it’s the only conclusion. The simplest and most obvious answer remains the most likely: the country elected Trump by choice.
When did I say I don’t trust math people? I do, but not when they’re saying “these numbers don’t look quite right, so here’s an entire story about how maybe they used satellites to steal an election.” I’ve said repeatedly through the thread that this stuff should be looked at, but we need to keep in mind that stealing an election is very hard to do and not immediately dismiss contrary evidence like the fact that many elections that absolutely could not be manipulated the same way showed a similar result of a giant swing to the right, or that independent exit polls didn’t report anything unusual.
I’m open to the idea that there might be something here, I just haven’t seen anything particularly compelling, it’s all been very typical conspiracy theory stuff. The Trump lawyer thing I did hear about, I don’t remember anything about actually changing results though, just unauthorized access. Trump saying something suspicious, well, he says a lot of stuff. The drop off rates being different between the two candidates seems sensible to me, I’d expect quite a few Trump voters to just care about Trump and not the rest of the races, and less so on the Democratic side. It’s the reason turnout now seems to help Republicans, they’ve won over a lot of unreliable voters and Trump brings them out better than most. A coordinated, multi-state conspiracy to rig the election seems very unlikely to stay completely airtight for over a year.
Is there a source that specifically claims that these anomalies are happening in states using the same voting system and not in others? I haven’t seen that in anything linked to me so far, and that would be at least interesting.
The breathless reporting and big numbers immediately set off my BS detector. Usually, when a stat says something like “the odds of this happening purely by chance are 1 In a hojillion!” it’s just bad statistics, for example saying “even if each of my windows had a 75% chance of breaking in the hurricane, the odds that all of them would break is less than 1%, so clearly someone sabotaged my house!” No, they were all in the same hurricane, not independent random hurricanes, you can’t just multiply the probabilities like that. It’s very easy to do bad stats and come up with wild results.
It also looks like this is mostly focused on Pennsylvania, where there’s actually more to look at. Again, sure! It’s worth looking into. Let’s see evidence that this crosses state lines and isn’t just Pennsylvania. Let’s see evidence that the machines really were vulnerable and not just that they could’ve been. Let’s find someone who will name names and give specifics about this conspiracy. If this stuff is true, it’ll get picked up by more sober voices that aren’t yelling “it was stolen, it was stolen, don’t you all see???” and then it might be worth tuning in.
If you go even further right than Charlie Kirk, they end up flipping from “yay Israel, help bring about the Book of Revelations and end the world” to “boo Israel, we hate Jews”, so as hard as it may be to believe, there is actually room for him to get hated from his right.