lifeformed

This assumes that children's learning is solely about correctness and obtaining information. There is a whole universe of other considerations, like interacting with other people, with adults, with fallible authority figures. Having a conversation with a teacher and getting the wrong answer teaches you far more about being a human being and living in a human society, than getting facts back from a screen. Yes, teachers being incorrect is something that should be improved, but reducing human interaction is not an improvement.

Is it actually that hard to make good models or is it just about the amount of resources you have to do training? (This is an actual question, I really don't know.) I'm sure it's not trivial but does it really take world class secret knowledge to build off of the known existing techniques? I feel like there's tons of low hanging fruit still to explore, and time and resources are the limiting factor.

Maybe a really lightweight fast LLM could moderate messages in realtime. Not sure how pricey that would get though.

Well I'm sure someone will tell it to.

I guess I don't understand which are the features Messenger has that Signal doesn't that requires a billion dollars a year to maintain.

But a messaging program like Signal is fairly similar in scope, but only has like a couple dozen of devs, compared to Messenger's thousands(?).

The truth is that if you get in early enough on a hype train and cash out in time, you will make money. That's enough of a rational basis to participate. The ostensible purpose of it all is basically irrelevant, except as a signal to participate.

It takes away from real human artists who do their part to slowly advance human culture. Music will not develop without human artists. Maybe for this moment in time AI can fulfill some people's musical desires, but it's not going to keep up with the times. The point of art, in a general sense, is humanity. Automating away your artistic needs is like automating away your social needs. It's a one way "relationship" that is superficial and self-indulgent. It's a step towards an empty world.

I think this article is agreeing with you. It's saying that it's not an "intelligence" failure in the traditional "military intelligence" sense of the word we expect, but rather it's an "intelligence" failure in "runaway idiocy" sense.

The whole industry is about robots telling robots what to do, why wouldn't they have expected automation?

That's still making assumptions based on our human understanding of the cosmos. Our "laws of physics" could be a localized understanding in our region of space, and much, much, much more powerful entities could operate outside of that, where our perception of time and scale does not meaningfully apply. It would be near-zero cost to destroy potential threats, so they might as well. It's like humans eliminating pests and pathogens. It's standard hygiene, a low cost preventative practice. Nobody is targeting a single bacterium, they're just wiping down dirty spots. It's an interesting concept in the book because of how imaginative it gets with scaling.

"Timescales that makes sense" may be a human reasoning but not necessarily the reasoning of inconceivably advanced timeless civilizations. Sure, that planet of fish may be harmless now, but what about in a quick three billion years when they have FTL and AGI and Von Neuman probes and Dyson spheres and antimatter bombs? Easier to click the delete button now to save the trouble later.

What "content of character" do you ascribe to a web scraper?

I guess a good way to preview things would go a long way. Merging might be unrealistic to generalize, but being able to diff on images, game engine prefabs, audio, etc would help deciding which one to use.

My issue with git is handling non-text files, which is a common issue with game development. git-lfs is okay but it has some tricky quirks, and you end up with lots of bloat, and you can't merge. I don't really have an answer to how to improve it, but it would be nice if there was some innovation in that area too.

But that's not what AGI is. Restructuring data the way they do is very impressive but it's fundamentally different from novel creativity.

As long as it's within the law? What if they politically control the law-making system? What if they've shown themselves to operate brazenly outside the law?

I buy my software by weight! Give me the biggest one you have, please. I'm talking hundreds of klocs.

It's not because of one incident. And the fascist part of these incidents isn't just the killing, it's the official response to it. They immediately claim the victims are terrorists and assassins and suppress investigation of it. Let's not pretend this is just some sad accident.

If I had a button that would wipe out the entire Amazon jungle and replace it with a world class high technology industry, I wouldn't even think twice before pressing it.

Wow. Why, because the Amazon is just a bunch of trees or something boring? If "high technology industry" is so much more valuable without even thinking twice about it, you probably don't understand very much of the world.

Are we supposed to be treating LLMs like sentient beings with their own identity and rights? I must've missed this civilization altering milestone.

You were anthropomorphizing software and assuming others are doing the same. If we are at the point where we are seriously taking a computer program's identity and rights into question, then that is a much bigger issue than a particular disagreement.

If morals or ethics aren't an equal partner in security, happiness, and prosperity, then the tribe deserves to fall.

Tedium in art is full of micro decisions. The sum of these decisions makes a subtle but big impact in the result. Skipping these means less expression.

You can say whatever you want, but pretentious sneering is annoying, don't be surprised if people push back.

Not a good one.

Has the quality of software been improving all this time?

I skimmed your comment since you were making the strange comparison that modern coding is basically probabilistic to a degree that prompting is, so I see now you weren't the one to say it's "probabilistic programming". But you are still trying to say that normal programming is basically probabilistic in some relevant way, which I think is quite ridiculous. I don't see how anything about normal engineering is probabilistic other than mistakes people make.

Name a single programming language that is probabilistic in any way?

This part seems all over the place. Firstly, why would an individual do something he/she has no expectation to benefit from or control in any way? Why would he/she cast away his/her agency for unpredictable outcomes and exposure to unnecessary and unconstrained risk?

It happens all the time. People sacrifice anything, everything, for no gain, all the time. It's called love. When you give everything for your family, your loved ones, your beliefs. It's what makes us human rather than calculating machines.