Well there are some:

- Firefly
- Relativity Space
- Blue Origin
- Rocket Lab

The guy that is improving ChatGPT probably has some coding sense.

As someone who taught programming for 15 years, I find LLMs a bit problematic. Since a common strategy was to give our students small problems to solve like:

- write a method the prints hello 10 times
- write a method that finds the even numbers in an array
- etc..

These sort of little exercises helped them understand things like the for loop and other basic concepts. The problem is that today you can feed that into ChatGPT and it probably would spit out the solution. Now, you could say that the student shouldn't do that. And cheaters never learn. But cheating has just become much easier and the temptation is great.

The same goes for problems where you complete the missing code, fix the bug in the code, or a small project like write up a calculator like the one Windows or Minesweeper.

Teachers will need new teaching methods, since ChatGPT can lift the weight of the simple problems. But if you can't solve simple problems, how do you develop the skills to solve the harder ones?

Commercial space was always run by small companies trying to get by. SpaceX changed that. Now Space flights are more common and slated to be even more common. Adding a tax to fund the increasing demands it is putting on the federal agencies that support these programs is not entirely unreasonable.

But I do wonder if that would make it harder for newcomers.

I think this would mainly raise the cost for SpaceX with its own private launches and its many tests. But SpaceX can probably handle that. It also has enough of a competitive advantage that it can raise costs for its customers without getting hurt by the competition.

What's the difference between creativity and hallucination?

Hallucination is unwanted creativity. Unfortunately LLMs are often desired for their creativity.

It's almost as if it was planned by clueless politicians... oh wait!

Sloppy. Here's an improved version (it's not C):

Program Goodbye(input, output);
Begin

      Writeln('Goodbye, World!');

End.

I wonder if we're even qualified to vote on judges.

Judge work is highly technical and most people have no visibility on how well a judge is doing.
I think a judge should be appointed by some board that has the technical knowledge to know if the judge is doing a good job or not.

Being a judge is not a popularity contest. Or shouldn't be.

It's just a ploy.

They're pretending to shut them down... only to open them "one last time".. so you can spend the last 5 nights at Chuck E Cheese.

Nothing sinister going on here.. don't worry.

The way humans learn how to interpret X-Rays is by looking at a bunch of images and forming some "rules" in their head.
How do they find those rules, by corroborating with other tests. Like if you see a tumor, you then run a test and verify that it is malignant.
Such a process in humans is slow, tedious, and error prone.

Such a process with a statistical machine like a Convolutional Neural Network is going to be able to form much better rules than some informal learning that has slowly developed across doctors.

What matters here is creating a good dataset. And verifying it with other means (such as biopsies) rather than "expert opinions". The expert opinions could be wrong.

But ultimately this is like any lab test. It will come back with a verdict such as "malignant" but that should lead to a confirming biopsy. To the extent that there are few false positives and even fewer false negatives, this will be a very useful tool. And it clearly has an advantage over humans.

All are unreliable, except for those that are reliable.

EVs are not as good, except the ones that are.

PHEVs are the least reliable, except the one that is super reliable.

All brands are bad, except for the ones that are good.

All legacy brands are no good, except for the legacy brands that are good.

In summary: useless to talk about EVs, or PHEVs in general. Talk about individual brands.

Q as in Q Anonymous?

Great. Some people will take it as an absolute truth generator, and others will dismiss it as a conspiracy bot.

Wow. I wonder how much Amazon pays the marketing guy to come up with this stuff.

OpenAI: Behold.. ChatGPT!
People: OMG.. autocomplete will destroy civilization
Pundits: ChatGPT is an existential threat to humanity
People: F-35 F*** yeah!
People: Oh.. .no.. AGI... oh no .. LLM.. oh no
People: F-22 shoot them out of the sky! ...
Meanwhile in the military: lets create swarms of AI robots to destroy civilization
Military laughing at us: haha.. they're scared of autocomplete, but don't even blink an eye on the literal civilization ending weapons we routinely create. They even cheer us on! Haha.

Are you able to use Falcon 40B with a reasonable GPU such as a 4090? Or do you need a A100 to play?

You may be right.

I tend to favor actual advances in tech, not smoke and mirrors. But I know investors may think differently.
Maybe Ilya will move over to Microsoft.