scotty79

Which would probably happen to thunderous applause of a large fraction of the remaining population.

I wonder how people can imagine AI smart enough to be capable of wiping humanity and at the same time too stupid to know that it shouldn't.

I can imagine a human like that way easier than AI.

There is a concept of causing accidental harm.

You know which people are eager to take on more responsibilities? The people who don't believe in the concept responsibility.

CEOs are basically dice rollers. "Proven" are just formerly lucky gamblers. The only control that CEO has is whether they roll the dice themselves or let their underlings roll. It's entirely possible that the only CEOs that are winning against the odds are the ones that roll themselves the least.

or they are using Kimi K2.x

That would be terrible because Kimi 2.x is in a different world than Kimi 3

Having opinions on current Kimi model based on 2.x would be like dismissing gpt-5.6-sol because of experiences with gpt4o

How about gainful transformation of natural language text? Because that's what AI users are hoping for.

This is such a petty and impotent ruling. If you want to ban them from using culture to make derivative works without proper compensation then do that.

But if you don't want to ban them, telling them to buy one book of each, likely second hand, is complete pettiness that resulted in destructive scanning of millions of books, many of which were already practically available in digital form.

What's gonna be your payout and are you satisfied with it?

The award was $3,000 per book, which is about 100X higher than it would have cost to buy the books.

How many of the authors would license their book for endless creation of derivative works for that amount?

Chinese companies compete ruthlessly between themselves though. That's how they get this good. Full competition with preventing exploitation by foreign countries seems to be working great for them. American and European protectionism of local rent-seekers can't really compete with that.

How the hell is non-compete legal in market economy? Competition is one of its core strengths. Why would anyone let anyone opt out of this, even a little bit?

Making an LLM from raw data is value-add. Distillation is just value extract.

There is a value-add in selecting the valuable parts out of the garbage. And let's face it. Largest models contain a lot of garbage.

And humans are designed to exploit that forgetfulness in others.

Is your child interested in Chinese AIs? Watch out! He might be a hacker. Report him to authorities immediately for assesment.

not unlike learning kitchen utensils and the locations of the drawers they’re in.

The problem is it's someone else's very messy kitchen where nothing is where you expect it to be.

It matters where things are. Photoshop vs Fireworks, CAD vs Sketch-Up.

The problem with this software is that you can't make it yours when you enter it.

I think AI will solve this, by searching where the utensils are and putting them where it is convenient for you specifically.

mistakes are at the moment a signature quality of human written texts, enjoy them

I already have a small sub. I think I can still upgrade/extend it, which is great.

OpenAI compaction is very different than Anthropic compaction, especially in 5.6

I use GLM5.2 and gpt-5.5 and 5.6 and never noticed any quality degradation near the limits of the context or due to compaction.

I can't really blame them that the biggest labs focused on trainig and realeasing huge models.

The niche for small models should be filled with medium sized labs doing distillations of the huge ones into consumer grade hardware runnable models and LORAs for the huge ones.

saying that Fable was barely an improvement on Opus. Like it or not, Anthropic have a genuine moat right now with that model,

What's more interesting is that Anthropic moat shrunk to just that model. There's zero reason to use any other model from Anthropic right now. And once they take Fable off subscription there will be zero reason to have Anthropic subscription.

were seen as the solution to all the problems of Internet communities

And the solution turned out to be putting every user in their own safety bubble of recommended conten and expanding the bubble only when user gets adventurous. And TikTok became gold standard for that that everone tries to emulate with varying degrees of success

I guess AI sycophancy does contribute to its success.

ChatGPT was released in November 2022 so only the last decisive blow was dished by AI. Stack Overflow was already 40% below its peek when it was struck.

However looking at the shape of this last drop, I think it wouldn't matter if the SO was in its prime when it happened. SO would die regardless, at the schedule dictated more by strengthening AI rather than its own.

I think the reveal button is counted as an upvote for the book because it supposedly discovered my taste and it was based on th books I revealed, but not bookmarked.

judging happens via AI

Why? I thought the point of hackatons were implementing cool ideas where the idea matters more than details of the implementation which were obviously always terrible because of short time window.

I think AI is going to enable a new future where most software products will have userbase of 1. And then they are not going to suck.

If anyone is interested in the text that flows around the cracks. Cracks are painted on canvas underneath and the text is laid out in spans with help of pretext javascript library.

I asked gpt-5.5 on sub running via pilot-proxy in a custom agent harness that I strapped to my custom web browser built with tauri and system webview.

similarly to how they are trivial for a human?

How do humans get their results at these tasks? Don't they try until they succeed and claim their best run as their result?