It's true that many people have self-serving reasons for hating LLMs.

About 1 million Americans have lost their job this year, with AI being a cited by employers.

I am certainly going to try getting ChatGPT to read and understand legal contracts before going to speak to a lawyer. The more I know, the better questions I can ask. I use a privately staged LLM to posed medical questions. Better than running the gauntlet of Canada's broken medical system. Yes I read articles from NIH. LLMs aren't a replacement for expertise. But these are concrete examples where LLMs threaten jobs while making ordinary people's lives better.

Job losses are a real concern, and people are right to be worried/concerned, even if economic change is good in the long run.

I'm more concerned by the cruddy quality. Ask it questions about the existence of God, and ChatGPT will say it has no opinion, and is NOT agnostic. Mmm, sure thing. Something is true/not true/cannot be talked about, if powerful people will get angry over what ChatGPT will say about it. Apparently there's as many people employed to "manage the message" as there are building the underlying useful technology. I find this pathetic.

The technology is amazing. It is a game changer. It'll be exploited by scammers. It has huge problems. It'll take time for society to adjust.

"We need money for roads and schools" is sometimes about paying for generous entitlements to previous employees.

Use Linux and MacOS, and iOS heavily. Gotta say that Linux is essentially hassle free. Very very few random changes to KDE system panels. Some minor stability issues with updating KDE. That's about all.

Mac has gone down hill a long way from the high UI standards of the 1980s. Using the control panel has devolved into a linear search. Stuff seems randomly organized probably due to Conway's Law. The worst feature is that you cannot uninstall itunes. The very existence of noTunes (so you don't accidentally boot itunes by hitting the wrong button) is a telling indictment on Silicon Valley's corporate culture.

I've had some great baking recipes from LLMs. Fun asking it why you'd do things. Eg., "why would you chill the batter of a cake?" Of course, I never expected it to give me 100% accurate information, and know enough about baking to parse the information that it's giving me.

Planned economies would likewise happily replace people with machines, if they could. The set of modern planned economies is very short: North Korea.

State capitalism -- where the state controls the decisions, but the profit motive remains, includes: China, Laos, Cuba, Turkmenistan, Eritrea... there's not a single country there that give a flying fsck about human rights.

So... Did you work on Microsoft Excel, the Intel Pentium, or both?

You jest, but it truly is terrible. Take this bit (if true): "(According to the report, more than 60 percent of students who took the previous version of the course couldn't divide a fraction by two." My immediate reaction to that was "WTF!?" You just need to double the denominator and simplify if possible and it's all integers no matter what, but, even if you don't simplify, 2/6 and 1/3 both answer the question "what is half of 2/3?".

That's not just a failure in maths skills, it's a failure in basic comprehension and ability to conceptualise a problem, which is far more wide-ranging and impactful than just being bad at math.

Sure, but nothing tangible would be lost - just some notional "Market Cap" reduction which is only really meaningful to Wall Street types, although that would also impact people's pension's etc.

Where nVidia would be exposed would be is companies have bought significant quantities of their chips, but go bust when the bubble pops without settling their invoices from nVidia first. Best case that ties up nVidia's cash while the bankruptcy process happens and they get a significant slice of the outstanding financial pie. Worst case the companies in question all implode with significant debts to multiple parties, their assets (mostly nVidia's chips) get sold off to pay off those debts, but nVidia still gets next to nothing once the assets are divied up. Combined with a heavily reduced market cap, that leaves nVidia with a significant reduction in cash-in-hand and a lack of value with which to help secure loans and investment, which in any case would need to come from a financial market reeling from a multi-trillion dollar bubble pop. The reality is more likely to be somewhere in the middle, but nVidia isn't going to sail through this completely unscathed either.

It's not just about the packages and whether they are malicious or not. These, so far at least, are not - AFAICT they don't even *claim* do anything at all that is functionally useful to a coder so they are never going to get downloaded; their sole purpose is to earn the uploader some of these TEA tokens which, when amalgamated across a few hundred thousand packages, is presumably worth something to them, or why bother? Now that the jig is up, the people that do like to peddle such malware are probably not looking too kindly on whoever pulled this off.

That's the secondary issue here ; like many similar things, whoever came up with this TEA token either didn't consider, or didn't care about, human nature. Anyone with half a clue, or the slightest care about the integrity of such a scheme, should be well aware by now that if you can earn something of value (which need not be monetary) by doing some online clicks, likes, shares, uploads, or whatever then some asshat is going to try and exploit the system so they can get all the benefits without the effort. If your system isn't baking in countermeasures against that kind of abuse, then it's a PoS that should never have left the drawing board but, all too often, human nature rears its head again and says "ship it anyway!" and the enshitification continues.

They hyperscalers are building out (or re-activating) grid-level power supplies for DCs that are not online yet, so are essentially not included in the 2025 figures. All Electrek (a pro-green energy site with a very obvious bias to that effect) are saying is that we collectively built out enough solar and wind to exceed the overall global increase in demand during 2025. Sure, that's a good thing, but it says nothing about how much excess non-green capacity was decomissioned last year (relatively speaking, hardly any), or by just how much that annual green capacity roll out will need to ramp-up to avoid building/re-activating additional non-green power plants to power the new hyperscaler DCs over the next few years (quite a lot, unless the AI bubble pops and most of them never get built).

Frankly, I'd prefer it if they just stopped trying to put a positive spin on everything green and told it like it is for those too dumb/lazy to read between the lines. Yes, we're collectively rolling out greener energy sources at a decent clip, but still far, far, below the rate needed to achieve any meaningful mitigation of mankind's effect on the climate in the timescales that are probably required. According to Electrek nearly everything moving us towards a net zero economy automatically gets an A+ when the reality is probably closer to a B-, or even a C+, must try harder.

It wasn't hard to tell that the emperor in the fable was naked at the equivalent point in the tale either, but it still took that lone voice to pipe up and say so. In the case of sub-prime, the smart people (or at least their smart financial advisors) sat up, paid attention to what Burry was saying and took some mitigating action, everyone else took a bath or, if they had the right contacts and leverage, got a government bailout.

In my mind, AI is just about at that point but is still suffering from a combination of the Greater Fool theory and Dunning-Kruger syndrome. The people backing the AI bros and the bros themselves all know it's a bubble (Sam Altman even flat out said so), but as long as they can keep pulling in money from the pool of Greater Fools to pay the bills, and their Dunning-Kruger leads them to believe they will be the select few that realise it's time to bail right before the bubble pops to maximise their profits and avoid taking the hit, unlike all the other losers, they're going to keep pumping air into it.

Wasn't this covered in "Orphan Black", where the clones all had the ASCII string "Property of Dyad Institute" encoded into their DNA? I have zero doubts that these self-serving asshats won't do something very similar with any "creations" they might make, no matter how egalitarian they make their motives sound. That they are trying to do an end run around the law of their land by going overseas says it all; they have zero ethics, and zero fucks will be given if it all goes horribly wrong.

I happen to dislike Douglas Hofstadter, actually. He isn't nearly smug enough.

The halting problem isn't unsolved at all; there are simple programs that can be fed into the testing framework for which the behavior is impossible to analyze, i.e., undecidable. Perhaps you got "unsolvable" and "undecidable" mixed up.

The original formulation of Pascal's wager is actually quite interesting—it's a game-theoretic probability analysis, described long before game theory was devised and when probability was in its infancy. Pascal's mugging targets the assumptions of the wager rather than its logic: in his writing, the nature of the divine is regarded as immutable, certain, and consistent with church doctrine.

To judge Pascal's intellect we really have to look at the context in which he was writing—the middle of Europe and the height of the witchcraft scare—and observe that he seems to have omitted the possibility of a demon (the sort that witches were alleged to commune with!) posing as a fake god, an idea that was explored extensively in early Christian heresies such as Gnosticism and Marcionism. Moreover the seventeenth century, Huguenots (protestants) were all over France, and so all of his readers would have been intimately familiar with questions of which doctrine was more authentic.

A lot of authors in this period heavily self-censored in order to avoid conflict with the state. Although the Inquisition was no longer active in France, the church had an immense amount of power, and running afoul of it could cost one's livelihood or worse. (Not to mention the sensibilities of patrons.) In some cases we only know an author's real position on occult subjects because of texts that were published posthumously or barely circulated; Isaac Newton, for example, wrote way more on magic and alchemy than on gravitation, calculus, or optics.

It's possible Pascal was not the theological bootlicker we've remembered him as, and, frankly, it's hard to imagine he never considered the flaws of the Wager, considering the messy world he lived in. Unfortunately there's no room for nuance when it comes to the popular narrative of, "child prodigy mathematician drinks too much communion wine and tragically starts spouting nonsense upon reaching adulthood."

Then breathing is animal abuse, and we're all humongous jerks for existing.