There is a difference between your Bank account password and your Slashdot password. I am perfectly willing to use 123456 as my slashdot password. I don't, but I am willing to use it. But my bank accounts now use two factor authentication.

Frankly, there are a ton of services that ask for a password for the benefit of the SERVICE, not for you. They want their metadata on you to be clean, rather than caring about your privacy.

If the study did not ask what the passwords were for, then the study proved nothing.

That is true. But they did not make it illegal, just problematic. Anyone under her jurisdiction is likely to get rid of Flock cameras. But they did it in Washington State, this is California. Judges have areas they control.

You could make a similar request for San Francisco. But San Francisco is a much bigger city. As such, they will have to pay a much larger amount to the city for the costs of making such a request.

Cheaper to start a new case and have it disallowed on legal grounds rather than merely making it politically dangerous to allow Flock cameras.

I think your model is only one of several alternatives. I don't foresee a unitary intelligence as likely, but an executive function delegating different tasks to different experts depending on context. And it can't be limited to language, it needs to interact more directly with the physical world. But we're already taking steps in that direction.

Yes, it's difficult. Perhaps it will take awhile. But there's absolutely no reason to expect human intelligence to remain the top measure. (Even now there are lots of contexts where it isn't. Try to out-calculate a spreadsheet. What the spreadsheet can't do is design itself.)

I found GP2.5 to be great at academic-style research and writing; it was absolutely awful at writing code. So; I would tell it to plan some thing for me and write it in a way that could be used by another agent (Claude Code) to build the code to do the thing. In this way, it has been great! I haven't yet attempted it with 3.

That said, I found GP3.0's page to be hilarious:

It demonstrates PhD-level reasoning with top scores on Humanityâ(TM)s Last Exam (37.5% without the usage of any tools) and GPQA Diamond (91.9%). It also sets a new standard for frontier models in mathematics, achieving a new state-of-the-art of 23.4% on MathArena Apex.

It then proceeds to show, lower down on the page, an example of what it can do, by showing off 'Our Family Recipes". If there's anything that touts PhD-level reasoning and writing, it's a recipe book.

Simplified so smart children can understand it:

Nuclear power is just using radiation to heat water (or something else that is later used to heat water), then using the steam to turn a turbine, connected to magnets creating electricity in wires near the magnets. To do this we need a source of radiation that is consistent. To much and it gets so hot it melts everything near it ( 'melt down'). Too little and the radiation is not sufficient to keep going.

Radiation is when you spew out atomic particles - we will be focusing on spewing out neutrons. When they hit things it can heat them up and/or cause other atomic particles to spew out of the thing it hit. A chain reaction is when a material has enough radiation that they spew out enough particles to continue the process indefinitely.

Cold criticality is the point where you have enough radiation to create a chain reaction but the heat being generated is not that much. Not enough to make steam to turn a turbine. No electricity yet, but you are on the right track. Also, this is safe as it won't get hot enough to melt the machinery.

Delayed criticality when the chain reaction is strong enough to make steam to turn a turbine but not enough radiation to worry about. Things are delayed enough for you to control the situation. The neutrons are are going strong, but not fast enough to worry about a melt down.

Prompt criticality is when you get a run away reaction that keeps getting hotter and hotter. This is scary. Because it causes a melt down. This is unlikely to create a nuclear explosion because unless you intended to build a nuclear bomb, something melts and everything fizzles out.

Super criticality is what you build everything well enough to so that it won't melt down. This is called a nuclear explosion. Luckily you have to really work hard to build things this tough.

Good points, but not necessarily eternal truths. I suspect you could use magnetic fields to strengthen the cable. Of course, that would collapse if the power failed. But perhaps there are other alternatives that nobody has thought of.

Still, my favorite skyhook is the PinWheel, though it needs a hefty mass in a fairly low orbit (as well as long arms that reach into the stratosphere). But you need to lower as much mass as you raise (on the average) or the orbit decays.

Looks like you're implementing LISP.

What I wonder is whether it's any good. Admittedly, I don't wonder hard enough to listen to it, but then I generally (almost always) avoid podcasts.

There will be tools. But there will also be the more general intelligence. One can argue about the time-line, and that's quite reasonable, but denying it requires accepting spiritualism or some such.

For that matter, people are often used as tools. It's not an "either/or" choice.

He said "Buy my crypto or no funding."

The only way you could reasonably predict what jobs will be available would be to predict exactly how much more advanced AIs are going to get and how quicly. And any prediction is a "Wild Ass Guess".

FWIW, there's a company in China building humanoid robots for assembly line work. So far it's only sold less than a thousand, so it's probably still in the experimental stage, but if it's "nearly ready" then it will soon be ready.

Now most assembly line work is basically rote repetition, with only a limited number of special-case scenarios, to this is far from a general purpose robot...but it's enough to eliminate LOTS of jobs...if it's cheap enough. And if it is, one can expect incremental expansion into other roles.

It's not going to be an LLM. The LLM is just what it's going to use to talk to you. But "world models" are being built, and that is going to be the basis of real intelligence.

The thing is, it wouldn't help things for one player to quit.

OTOH, as someone else pointed out, the government isn't exactly trustworthy either. (I consider accepting funds from lobbyist groups to be accepting bribes, just like accepting funds from individuals.)

On the third hand, open source approaches can't limit the use to which something is put.

Perhaps the "corporate powers" are the least bad choice...but that sure isn't encouraging.

Sorry, but "death by GPS" is a label, not a reality. Someone decided to follow the instructions of the GPS. So this is not analogous to an actually self-driving car.

I would say that every nation exists as a mixed economy, unless the government has so collapsed that it's no longer worthy of the term.