Certainly something of a jaw dropper for sure. You'd think this would be one point everyone would come together on.

Doesn't bode well for the future.

What better way to reach into internal networks to collect training material.

At least Zucker did declare all his users as dumb fucks from the outset.

So true! This caving is only under regulatory duress and I doubt it'll apply outside the EU.

Move away from the insanity of LLMs and massive data centre build outs and get more focused on efficient local hardware uses.

Radiologists is exactly one of the occupations that was listed for supplanting humans if I'm not mistaken. The fact it isn't coming true is more telling of the expectations of AI capabilities than anything.

As for pay, it'll be rising because demand is higher than ever.

What do you think drives those prices up? It's like house loans - Make it too easy to transfer the costs to the future and you immediately incentivise charging more in the present.

LMMs don't understand truth, lies, guilt, confessions or any other reasoning. If you ask to say it cheated it'll happily do so. It'll say whatever you want it to say.

Sammy is such a con.

More importantly, these uses are not using massive datacentres to perform their function. It runs fine on local hardware.

It's not a LLM. There is no supervision since the software doesn't make decisions. It's probably best classed as a type of image enhancement. It just makes the job quicker and therefore cheaper.

And when something in demand gets cheaper it also get used a lot more.

LLMs do get used in healthcare, for note taking, transcribing and form filling. And that does require the doctor to review the final output. Apparently very effective at speeding up of keeping patient records - And doesn't need huge hardware resources.

None of these healthcare uses will need massive public facing datacentres.

Because OpenAI doesn't actually care about privacy. They're just using that argument as a smokescreen.

If you can't fight fairly, then kick below the belt: Use the banks to rape the world then throw in tariffs for good measure.

The cops screwed up then. The law wasn't being enforced.

That's just plain wrong. It doesn't matter if the dog was allowed there or not. Legally, it's always the car at fault.

The best you could try arguing, as any sort of defence against being completely at fault, even as a human driver, is suicide had been attempted.

If it could be demonstrated the dog was attempting suicide then leniency might be considered towards the driver's failure to avoid the accident.