senordevnyc

Eh, my daughter had one when she was 2-3, before she would have been able to ride a pedal bike, and it was definitely helpful for her learning. She had training wheels on her next bike for a day or two and then we took them off and she rode without issue.

We also lived in an apartment and a tiny balance bike was a lot less disruptive than a pedal bike with training wheels.

It's a boring answer, but nerds are cynical because they think it makes them look smarter.

What? Why? Why would those first two be "technical problems" that we can "solve" with innovation, but that last example isn't? What makes something a technical problem vs. a societal problem?

Anthropic/OpenAI were touting PhD-level intelligence three years ago

No, they weren't. GPT-5 was where OpenAI started talking about PhD-level, and that was less than a year ago.

Eh, I don’t think there’s any reason to think #3 is true, and the whole thing being a house of cards is predicated on that one.

If the massive demand is still present for compute at market rates (which I believe it is), then your second point is just investors spending cap ex to build out valuable and profitable assets, no problem there.

Time will tell.

I’m not the one here agitating for mass violence.

starts going on about politics, human rights and all that rubbish? To be honest, we Chinese IT professionals possess a genuine geek spirit.

An incredible amount of damage has been done in the world by "geeks" who lack a sense of care for ethics, human rights, "and all that rubbish".

"professional educator here, with fifteen years of high school teaching experience"

You do ACT / SAT prep and tutoring, correct? Just wanted to be clear, because the description here sure makes it sound like you're a high school teacher.

The digital camera market will be approaching that level of value inflation adjusted around 2030.

Only if you ignore the digital camera sector responsible for probably 99% of all digital photos taken…

OpenAI just closed the largest funding round in SV history, $122 billion. The idea that you’d find it laugh out loud funny to call them well-capitalized just reveals your bias.

OpenAI has plenty of cash to fight this. Apple having hundreds of billions doesn’t actually mean anything in a legal fight that might cost OpenAI nine figures in legal fees, maybe? If it goes for years?

A historic judgment against OpenAI (zero chance of that here) might actually drive them out of business, but they’re far beyond the threshold of being well-capitalized enough to fight Apple on this for years.

This is a nothingburger.

How much do you think they actually need to fight this?

BP spent a billion on defense attorneys for Deepwater Horizon. There’s a zero percent chance it costs OpenAI anywhere close to that to fight this, but even if it did, a billion over the next few years wouldn’t even be a speed bump for them.

That’s not true! Only Levandowski was barred from working on self-driving, the judge specifically elected NOT to force Uber to stop all self-driving work [1], let alone stop all software work, let alone this being anything that was a mortal threat to Uber. Uber was also worth about $50 billion at the time, about 1/20th the size of OpenAI.

The point isn’t that an injunction is impossible, but the idea that Apple will get an injunction that shuts down all software deployments at OpenAI, leading to the end of the company, is pure fantasy.

1. https://www.wired.com/2017/05/uber-waymo-injunction/

Right, just like you think that Apple is somehow going to magically get an injunction that freezes ALL software deployments at OpenAI and drives them out of business.

People’s inability to reason in the face of their hatred for Sama is wild.

If OpenAI used any of Apple's secrets broadly, Apple could ask the court for an injunction to block the deployment of any software from OpenAI. If discovery proves the IP contamination spread into other areas within OpenAI, it could completely freeze all of their deployments.

I find this so funny. Can you share an example or two of where something like this has ever happened to one of the largest companies in the world? There is no universe where some judge orders that OpenAI can no longer deploy any software, for anyone (including huge swaths of the federal government) because of the alleged actions of a few people, and it’s allowed to stand. Zero chance.

I’ll say one thing for Sama: he might have a lot of haters, but it’s not that hard to prove them wrong with predictions like these.

This take seems wildly disconnected from reality.

My prediction: this will result in a relatively modest undisclosed settlement and OpenAI won’t abandon, or even modify, their hardware product because of this. And Apple definitely won’t get an “open kimono” to everything OpenAI has planned.

This is two of the largest, most powerful, most well-capitalized companies on the planet in a legal fight. People are taking sides because of their hatred of Sama, and it results in these bizarro takes that OpenAI is finished as a company lol.

Guess we’ll see.

This is the logical take. I would bet that this doesn’t doom anything, they’ll just quietly settle it, likely for a relatively small amount.

People here are way too invested in hating Sam to be remotely rational on this topic.

Wait, so you're annoyed that the boomers are using their wealth to help support their kids (the respondents to this survey) instead of just giving it to them and making them trust fund kids?

Don't get me wrong, there's plenty of negative things to say about boomers, but I'm not sure how your complaint here really fits the article.

That's also incorrect, it's not net worth > $1mm, it's "those with total household investable assets, excluding pensions, retirement plans and property" over $1mm, which is a much smaller number. The sources I saw said about 4% of US households meet this criteria, but 18% of survey respondents did.

There is something genuinely beautiful to me that these goofy apes have managed to turn sunlight and sand into intelligence.

Didn't Honda cancel the 0 series?

It gets easier if you stop worrying so much about what these strangers think. Tip 15%, let the receipt checker roll their eyes when you walk past, let them judge you on your self-checkout speed, etc. Who cares?

And that indulgence has been cloaked in specious, ivory-tower claims about producing well-rounded students

I suspect your comment is exactly what they’re talking about. I actually agree with your claim, but with limits! And yet the proponents of your position always seem to want a blank check.

How much exactly should the taxpayers pay to ensure that little Timmy goes to college and gets “an appreciation for what makes life worth living”, and why that amount? And how do we know if it’s working or not?

No offense to your wife, but why should the taxpayers fund her English degree so that she can then stay home with the kids? Sure, there might be some diffuse societal benefit, but if you can’t quantify it, how can we collectively decide if the benefit is worth the cost?

The UC system has about 300k students, CSU has about 475k. So more representative, yes, but I wouldn’t say far more so.

Exactly, the study has nothing to do with AI, and yet you’re here pushing a narrative that AI / screens destroy vision in some unique way. You wouldn’t comment about books.

But this thread couldn’t be less interesting, so I’m out.

Like the manager being responsible for someone on a PIP.

Obviously they’re different, but it’s interesting to think about what is unique about humans that makes them able to be accountable or responsible in a way that LLMs cannot be. Is it at core just that they can be fired? Or essentially the threat of suffering?

I don’t know, I can imagine that the equivalent of a PIP for an agent would be noticing flaws in its output and then creating additional evals, modifying the harness, upgrading the model, etc. to improve its performance. That’s not SO different from the PIP, except that the LLM doesn’t really care in the same way?

Man, it must be exhausting to have reading comprehension this bad.

Let’s try again: your claim is that LLMs “make up stuff all the time”, so they can’t be used to educate children.

I’m saying that modern SOTA models do not make up stuff all the time as it pertains to the topics a child of 4-9 would learn. That doesn’t mean they’re perfect or will never make mistakes, but there’s zero reason to think such issues would be widespread. And common sense would tell you that perfection is not required for LLMS to be a net positive in education.

I’m sure you’ll have another vapid rejoinder, but this has been boring for awhile and you seem to be enjoying being obtuse, so I’m moving on.

The common sense part is not holding LLMs to a standard of absolute perfection that literally no other medium, or humans, can reach.

You’re welcome to your views, but they don’t make a lot of sense, or fit with reality. Continue angrily tilting against windmills I guess.

I hate tip culture too, but I don’t blame the employees for it. I never tip for takeout, counter service, retail, etc, and I’ve never actually had anyone complain or so much as make a face.