Jtarii

There is an enormous amount of computer science that most programmers are completely unfamiliar with, especially within academic CS: programming-language theory, type theory, formal semantics, compiler theory, algorithmic research, complexity theory, distributed computing theory, verification, cryptography, computational geometry, numerical methods, and so on. Being proficient in one narrow area does not automatically give you the prerequisites for another.

And the difficult part of all those areas of computing is the mathematics part. Which I think is what I am arguing, mathematics is a fundamentally different type of "difficult" to any other subject.

You could get a surface level understanding of TCP, or 99% of topic areas in computing, in less than 4 weeks of study. You could not get a surface level understanding of literally any of the maths in the link in less than 4 weeks of study.

The vast majority of what computers do just isn't that complex. I'm not saying it isn't "complex" just that any reasonably smart person can understand how a computer works and still have other hobbies, basically no one can understand phd level mathematics without dedicating their entire lives to it.

None of what you listed is even 1% as intense as the mathematics in the link.

Learning anything in maths requires weeks of hard effort, learning enough to be broadly comfortable in how an 8086 CPU works can be done in a weekend.

Escaping AI slop will become a privilege for the wealthy.

If a human makes something there should be broad protection for creativity, if a LLM generates something there should be extremely limited protection for creativity.

You should not be able to mass generate images in a particular artists style and claim it as fair use, even if a human making the same images would have protection.

I just mean, anything Tao writes that is related to AI will get on the front page, because Tao represents the authoritative voice of reason using AI tools. And this website is primarily for AI news.

People are upvoting this because Tao is a celebrity.

This incentive is inevitably going to lead to ad supported LLM's not answering questions properly the first time so more ads served.

The extra inference cost is going to be greater than whatever fraction of a penny they would get from doing this.

AI psychosis.

Renting is significantly less risky from a financial standpoint.

And by "no one" you mean almost everyone.

This is just conspiracy nonsense.

If you are making meaningful things then you shouldn't be afraid to sound pretentious.

Everyone's so terrified that they might stand out.

They will make a bunch of money then maybe go out of business eventually when the economics shift? Do they need an endgame?

Some people are just happy to follow the money.

I was more thinking they would be funding US labs.

Presumably the US military / NSA.

Whether or not its legal to distil models, it is obviously morally permissible to do so.

Anthropic, OpenAI, etc do not deserve legal protection.

I don't think many Europeans are lamenting that companies are advertising to Americans more than them.

If stack overflow was universally loved, AI would still kill it.

People here seem to be so emotionally invested in hating stack overflow that they seem to think AI was like ~10% of the reason it died, when it was 95%.

So you think its mostly just coincidence that 4 years after AI is introduced stack overflow is dead?

Instantly freezes the moment I try to interact with it on firefox.

most people don't have the ability to do much creatively with a shoestring budget.

I'm sure in a room full of musicians they could come up with more creativity for a video than literally 0, which is what LLMs are currently capable of.

This might be the most pretentious waffle I have ever read lmfao.

You write like the critic from Ratatouille.

Really wish websites weren't allowed to force smooth scroll on. Hijacking basic browser functionality is so hostile.

Really looking forward to when we advance past the "Design — by Claude" phase.

So if this photo was generated by an LLM it would have exactly the same emotional valence to you?

https://www.artic.edu/artworks/5817/tereska-a-child-in-a-res...

Yes it is.

CGI animals are still universally awful.

Also what all of Nolan's dialogue is.

No one is denying that AI can generate worthless slop, just how most of what humans generate is worthless slop.