catigula

I do the same kind of thing. "You're smarter now, time to try to cut down dumbo ChatGPT".

High IQ bros.

Stealing IP in a way that destroys the economic incentives of a company to create the thing isn’t competition, it’s typical Chinese industrial economic deception and malfeasance. The industry cannot sustain itself if that’s the model and that’s the point; China is trying to damage frontier us companies. It’s hostile, a bad actor that leverages Ip theft wholesale.

I’m certain they did.

The problem is… what are you going to do about it?

This is obviously an idiotic and dangerous Cold War and has no happy ending.

Via sophisticated cyberattacks, which we know are now possible on an unprecedented scale without nation state resources or capabilities.

Have you… have you been following the news at all?

This isn’t science fiction. It’s happening right now. AI models can execute massive cyberattacks autonomously.

You could, in theory, use an unbounded GPT-6 level model to basically destroy the world economy for many years.

The problem is that it’s impossible to out think a robot you designed to be an expert at cybersecurity on the topic of cybersecurity. The alternative is not developing this and that’s not going to happen.

"We made 3.6/4 Pro, but it sucks, so this is the distilled model" vibes.

That's nice.

It's called Alpha Zero specifically because it was trained from scratch - zero, not on human data.

No, they are not. Specifically, this was a method based specifically on learning from scratch, like most modern AI models.

Why do you think it's called Alpha ZERO?

Chinese models, hurray!

I think you misunderstood. “Narrative” typically frames something as polemic or open to interpretation, which this is about equally so to the whole “spherical Earth” story.

Narrative?

Kind of like the sphere Earth narrative.

Damaging American AI companies just means that China has the lead with closed models.

China isn’t an altruistic state. They’re an aggressor in many fields, economic and otherwise, and this one of them.

Companies had Claude Mythos access in April. Low chance this is on that level.

The extinction threat from AI to all organic species is a little more comprehensive than a little bit of extra concrete, per the people making the AI themselves (I disavow this etc. etc).

The state intervened to stop the Chinese from sabotaging their furnaces. Seems like an open and shut case unless you have 5 eyes intelligence sources.

Unfortunately, his plans aren't very good.

Being good at developing AI and being good at AI safety are diametrically different skillsets with obvious conflicts of interest.

Classic

racism

racism, Japan

Type scenario.

Tariffs and import controls. Why do you think that BYD is banned from the US?

Which "frontier models" are you familiar with in a programming context?

I'm a staff engineer and the amount of work and even troubleshooting the latest crop of LLMs can do at my behest is jaw-dropping.

I perused your comment history, and you refer to models as 'ChatGPT', which doesn't really inspire much confidence that you know what you're talking about.

People keep telling you that you're behind and using old technology and that the most recent models are really good and a sea-change because, well - they are.

Any need to address the huge numbers of foreign workers in America putting direct, nonnegotiable pressure on those jobs?

It's time for the program to end.

Sorry, but you aren't familiar with frontier models if you think it's not "good enough". The latest models are quite a bit more capable than most people in many regards already.

As long as the term “AI” means by-and-large LLMs with additional features sprinkled on top, the answer is no. More likely (without careful vetting by the folks aggregating these models) is that the quality will go down as more and more AI-generated output gets subsumed into these models.

Nope. This isn't how it works.

AI progress has largely been synthetic and has produced leaps and bounds capabilities increases in the last couple of years.

Sorry.

Paying people less and replacing them with AI is the literal explicit strategy; I get that this was supposed to be a cynical comment but it's basically just factual.

Every human being is self-interested, at least to some degree. So, it is perfectly expected that he seeks money, fame, status, power, sex, etc.

Bit of a reach there.

Wow what a piece of shit.

Thanks; I read the story you linked. It mostly reads as a hit piece centered around various legal allegations tied to stringent confidentiality agreements. There isn't much substance beyond that. The article briefly discusses some vague customer complaints about allulose-directed side-effects from his 'longevity mix', but the actual complaints are incredibly vague and you could attribute side-effects to or from basically any supplement. The article is basically a long-form screed saying over and over "he makes you sign confidentiality agreements".

I don't like Bryan Johnson per se, I just don't think that mal-intent has been substantiated.

For your second claim, I had to use ChatGPT to source it. It turns out that there was a problem with an earlier batch of one of his many supplements being out of spec per the COA. This is common and not unusual. He provides lab testing and COA for his current supplements. The unusual part is that anybody even ever knew his supplements were out of spec because companies don't really publish COA - and people knew because he did publish COA.

His protocols are usually pretty robustly researched. The worst thing you can say about Bryan Johnson is that I personally believe he over-indexes on suspect science, but that's it.

Every modern workflow implicitly relies on that. No infrastructure is fully robust. There's a senior DB person who has learned many things many times over who could bring down most of the US power grid.

For some reason, research like this has a much more apocalyptic feeling than it has in the past.