golemotron

I'd just be happy if companies were required to call them licensed and forbidden to call them sold or owned by the buyer.

The subtle thing in all this is that it externalizes labor costs. You are the one doing the work. I was thrown by this a while ago checking into a hotel with kiosk. I was out of my time zone and literally half asleep. Typing my name was real labor at that point.

I don't think that "root[ing] for mathematicians to go away" is the problem. The problem (if there is one) is that the process by which that occurs is economically determined. No amount of complaining will stop AI from being useful in mathematics or erase the incentives to make it better. It's automatic process, like photography sidelining painting or shoe factories sidelining cobblers. We go through this with every technological advance and the outcomes are pretty much determined. No cheerleaders are needed.

It seems like California is the furthest country in the EU.

Those old stories may have been full of crazy stuff, but look at children's programming over the past 30 years. SpongeBob characters, under the ocean, jumping off a diving board into a pool, again, under the ocean. It isn't violent, but it is crazy.

I think that children's authors primarily amuse themselves knowing that it will pass right over the heads of their target audience. It sure seems true of Collodi.

I'll never forget his theory about the origin of the heart symbol.

The Gompertz function strikes again.

That's true, but it can be a trap. I recommend always generating a few alternatives to avoid our bias toward the first generation. When we don't do that we are led rather than leading.

Yet we see directors as artists. Kubrick, Coppola (both of them), Hitchcock, etc.

Look at it this way. The carver doesn't have to grow the tree. Using an LLM for coding is a lot like being a carver. You can take broad or small strokes and discard what you don't like.

I'm in the conserving camp. It's more truthful than the narrativization that accompanies attempts to restore. We should remember that we all had a reptilian vision of dinosaurs for decades (centuries?) before the latest feathered view. We would have been better with neither. Just display the bones: what we have. Everything else burdens the public with guesses.

It's nice to see a passion project.

I would go so far as to say that it should be illegal for AI to lull humans into anthropomorphizing them. It would be hard to write an effective law on this, but I think it is doable.

Great article but disappointed that the monkey with the camera did not make an appearance.

And now 'physical' becomes as hyperbolized as 'violence.'

Sure, you can trade but it is a choice. Claiming that free trade is universally good is saying that there is only one right choice - no barriers.

There are many arguments but the most straightforward one is that a country may decide that preserving particular industries is in their security interest. That can be extended to culture as well.

Japan closed itself off from the world for centuries during the Edo period. One could say that they suffered economically due to that, but on the other hand, they ended up creating one of the more unique cultures in the world, developing in ways very different from others. It's an interesting kind of diversity.

This comes from the dated perspective that free trade is universally good. Nations create their own trade rules and they ought to be able to enforce them. I consider that far preferable than attempts to exert extraterritorial control over services from other countries.

If, say, Uruguay doesn't like content on Facebook, they are free to block it. In their opinion, they are protecting their citizens and that's ok. It should not produce legal action that could result in least common denominator style global content censorship.

In an ideal world, there would be no country level blocking but invariably laws will differ.

The juice isn't worth the squeeze.

Why do people want to signal their low status?

Isn't every advanced technology is seniority-biased?

..and regulation. The same with supersonic.

All utopias are dystopias because they deny reality. With enough perception and wisdom you can find the good in an imperfect universe.

More businesses than the authors can imagine work this way. They really ought to sit down and have a coffee with some salespeople.

If you know enough cognitive science, you have a choice. You either say that they "know" or that humans don't.

It's like the critique "it's only matching patterns." Wait until you realize how the brain works.

The idea that Congress can set up agencies that are outside the control of the Executive needs to be revisited. It leads to rogue, unaccountable bureaucracy.

Nothing to worry about. Anti-Natalism is self-extinguishing.

No, I just think that the space can be cleared up with legislation.

It's a weird world where works created with a prompt are not creative enough for protection but pictures taken by randomly pointing smartphone cameras (which use significant amounts of AI internally, btw) are copyrightable.

No truer words have been said.

This is clearly a case where we need new legislation. The US Copyright Act needed to be amended to cover photography. Prior to that photos were not copyrightable. It seems like we are on the same trajectory now.

The real problem is that Congress is institutionally incapable of making simple amendments to law. Everything gets delegated to agency rule making regardless of whether anyone likes the outcome.