__alexs

So glad I stopped wasting my subscription fee on these stupid vanity projects.

Is it still a tomb if someone already stole all of the human remains centuries ago?

Christianity has an ancient tradition of relics in which even in the absence of an actual corpse people will just pick up some random bone and be like "this was some old ladies actual hand, it has magic powers now" and then parade it around the city every year.

I just got back from a triple to Naples where there's a church that had a secret skull collecting cult under it for decades, it's a tourist attraction now. Yes it is still full of peoples skulls.

So yes, it seems like there is a statute of limitations on our obedience to the dead.

I'm sure some people said the same about ballet.

Is it somehow LESS nerdy to understand the geopolitics behind the tech we use? I guess we have different definitions of nerd.

NK is so heavily militarised and culturally isolated that an extraordinary rendition is likely to backfire even more so than they typically do.

The same way people generally equate luddism with anything. By entirely misunderstanding what it was to make a point that sounds snappy without all of that boring understanding history stuff.

You are simultaneously arguing for a more complex and nuanced testing approach that demands much higher quantities of data as a result, and also against RCTs, which perhaps rightly you've identified as having suffered from the same kind of cost disease as all other health care in the USA. I can't help but feel like you've identified the wrong root cause here.

The problem is that people are not listening to each other. Part of this is just working together is hard, but a bigger part is that there is status associated with being "in charge" of things as founder. The desire to feel like you are controlling the outcome and people need to take instruction and direction from you rather than working together to find a path through the forest.

Good stress test for your SQL parser I guess.

100% this. I read these caveats in new models and all I hear is "we made sure this model has no idea about computer security." Such a weird thing to brag about.

I find it hard to trust a ranking system that gives Sonnet a higher capability score than Fable.

If the EU develops a market leading model to even control in the first place I think that would at least be a neutrally good outcome.

Actually it's the opposite. Per mm of silicon it's massively less efficient and making enough chips and powering them is a major bottleneck right now. Worse, scaling to larger models requires more of our absolute best quality silicon manufacturing, where e.g. an H200 mostly just needs more memory.

Oh sure the EU is terrible at all technology policy but it also seems like this is sort of a don't interrupt your enemy when they are making as mistake situation.

If the US commit to handicapping their AI industry like this it's going to destroy the competitiveness of those companies globally. All of those US spending commitments on data centres etc are going to collapse, or americans will need to pay 2x the token cost of the rest of the world. Both very bad options.

I don't understand how this doesn't entirely screw the TAM for these companies?

As an EU company I think I now basically have to consider US AI as hostile and avoid it.

There are legal forms of killing. It is only via the application of our legal institutions that criminality is decided. No specific act on its own is criminal, there is no Platonic Crime.

This doesn't illustrate anything. OJ was innocent until the second trial found him guilty, they just had a different variety of punishments available.

Only our legal institutions and the frameworks they create can decide if any specific act is a crime.

It goes to space like all the other heat does otherwise we'd be living on a ball of gently rotating lava.

Have you read Don Quixote?

What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

To be truly impartial I don't think you should even evaluate their claims directly. This allows them to focus the comparison on things they care about, not the things you care about. Instead you should decide what problems you need solving, and evaluate solutions to those problems against your own rubric.

A large part of vulnerability analysis is just having the time to crunch through enough possibilities. Expertise and smarts definitely speed this up but there's a lot of just turning the crank until something falls out. Even a relatively dumb model with some good prompting will find vulnerabilities if you ask it to and give it the time and resources to do so.

The majority of people that drink espresso drink it with milk.

This is private equity 101 no?

There's no ethical consumption of... ad supported content.

Surely this just uses state funds to train a pipeline of people to be immediately poached by frontier labs?

I like Cursor as a product but the add on cost of $0.25/M tokens is just too expensive on top of the models.

Hans Boehm built a Java library for this in the 1980s and 90s

Hans is such a prolific programmer that he wrote a Java library before Java was even invented?