It's just somebody training in llm it's not anyone actually following me around.

He's been doing it since before llms were widely available and he just seems a little more human now because he has access to them running on his GPU.

It's still laughably basic but I suppose it's better than when it was just a simple chat bot

I'm using text to speech because I'm too lazy and I'm an old man who spends a lot of time resting his back.

The points I made are valid. Too big to fail means something that can take down the whole economy if you allow it to fail and open AI is not that.

And we need to stop allowing ourselves to be held hostage by too big to fail companies. Because that's really what too big to fail means. It means powerful assholes set themselves up so that if they go down they take all of us with them so that they are untouchable.

But it's not a product either. This is meant to replace every worker on the planet.

As the saying goes AI is designed to allow wealth to access skill without skill accessing wealth.

The 1% have decided to dismantle capitalism. You know that question everyone always asks, who's going to buy their products?

Now imagine you are so wealthy that you are approaching something akin to godhood. But literally all of your wealth comes from these filthy consumers that you absolutely despise as lower class beings.

That's a dependency that you are going to want to desperately break.

So the goal is to automate everything. You will have a very small engineer class that keeps the machines running and a very small class of thugs to keep the engineers in line. Everyone else exists in a state of abject poverty and if their number is get high enough to be a problem you fire bomb them with drones until the populations are back under control. Basically pest control.

It's a new and dystopian type of feudalism. Feudalism without the peasants.

I don't know if the rich will pull it off. But they are absolutely going to try.

And because of that none of it needs to be profitable or because useful products.

AI isn't for you. It's for them.

That's fair. It is definitely the sort of thing you have to think about when you choose to rewrite a mature system, in whatever language.

But yeah, the fact this rewrite happened in rust appears to be irrelevant to this story... just like it was irrelevant to the CloudFlare "rewrite in rust leads to big speed-up" story yesterday.

Well, technically speaking - they can only get ONE date.

I have been into stuff being online since before there was widespread online to be on, but I have always been into it being based on open standards, as well as open source since that's been available. I went ahead and got a Google TV since we were already exclusively watching TV on a Google TV device (First a basic Fire Stick, then when they ruined that with updates, Nvidia shield tube) and even that is irritating sometimes even given that the convergence makes sense. I don't need any of my home appliances to have any features which require that I involve the internet. I do have one device which has "inherently" internet-based functionality, it's a weather station and it uploads to wunderground. But if I wanted that data for just myself, there is a proxy for that.

It seems to be.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

/me starts paying attention

I think there needs to be another thing, a market retraction by itself I would say is not deserving of the status. That's what I would call it also, it's not a collapse forever, it's a retraction. Yes it will suck for awhile but besides the inflated market values AI is not that valuable and it's incredibly fungible, there's no lack of options that do similar things at similar qualities.

Also a point against is that the fact that if OpenAI goes out of business other than the financials the whole thing will keep going anyway, all the value is in the IP and the talent pool which get's sold off and then they all get jobs elsewhere because they have talent. The actual physical assets they own are all very fungible, data-centers can be repurposed.

OpenAI can increase their rates if they need more money, and their customer businesses can decide whether or not OpenAI is worth the increased fees.

Unlike the 2008 situation, people aren't going to lose their homes if OpenAI fails. And, frankly, they're not gonna lose their jobs - businesses have been using "AI" as an excuse for cutting jobs. In fact, one could reasonably argue that OpenAI going under might result in an increase in employment!

Means letting them go takes down the rest of the us economy. They're not a bank and only have 8k employees.

They can go by by and it won't matter in the slightest.

Now the fact that we're all basically held hostage by the banks is something we ought to deal with but we a scared of socialisms so that ain't happening

Back in the 1970s and 1980s, a number of "non-profit fundraising support" businesses sprang up. They would hire lots of people and task them with cold calling individuals, asking for donations to the library / fire brigade / food bank... whomever had partnered with those fundraising businesses.

Well, it turned out their business model was to keep the vast majority of the donated money. Anywhere from 80% to 98% of an individual donation would NOT go to the non-profit, it was kept by the fund-raiser. This eventually became widely known as newspapers and TV news reports looked into it, and the businesses largely went away (although I'm sure a few still linger).

GoFundMe doesn't seem quite as egregious about it, but they've always seemed a bit slimy to me.

Here negligence would be enough to secure a substantial pay-out.

It's become a useful tool for dealing with cops who think all members of certain races look kinda the same.

Yup and LG has their WebOS signage system baked in as well. Saving grace is that these systems still assume many users will use in an offline running mode so there's no restrictions and those systems are much less onerous to turn off completely.

Sharp/NEC, Planar, Panasonic and a few others aren't hawking their own signage systems as well so they're the "dumbest" still today.

The main problem with ebikes is that there are so many that exceed legal power limits, or have more than just pedal assistance. It's bad enough that there are so many dangerous cyclists around, and kids on electric scooters.