The only thing local models do is produce text. Unless you run it in a harness which sees it generate "send all your data to www.evil.com" and actually does that, the model can't do anything.

For a lot of uses like coding, the model has to have harness support for things like reading and writing files, but for basic chat-bots they just have to generate text and the harness has to display it.

Didn't Biden lie about intentionally letting in 20M illegal aliens without background checks, and without even counting them, and claiming had no way of stopping them anyway? Just before Trump did it on his first day?

How about the thousands of lies Democrats have pumped out over the last 13 years about Trump? Have you ever visited the propaganda factories that are Reddit, MSNBC, or Vox?

Yeah, politicians and their media allies lie when their mouths are open. Trump can never tell enough lies to catch up to the left.

Anecdotally, I've had pretty solid results with gemini and grok not hallucinating when it comes to the law. Unlike these lawyers, I ask the LLMs to provide direct links to the legal code and/or case briefs, and they're usually pretty spot on, usually only disagreeing with one another in subtle ways that, in my non-lawyer mind, seem to be the kind of thing that could go either way. After all, the reason you end up in court to begin with is to have the court interpret exactly these kinds of disagreements that two parties might have on the precise meaning of the law.

ChatGPT, on the other hand, is just...bad. Just as with two years ago when it was all the rage, it still likes to speak in absolute terms (projecting high confidence) and link to shit that doesn't fucking exist. They've come up with many new model revisions, but it still has the same basic problems it has always had.

The Luna experiment illustrates an important distinction between task automation and organizational autonomy.

An agent may be capable of interacting with email, browsers, telephones, financial systems, and other operational tools, yet still lack the higher-level judgment required to operate a viable business. Retail, for example, requires continuous decisions about demand, inventory, pricing, customer behavior, risk, and capital allocation. These are not simply interface problems.

The vending-machine incident demonstrates a related issue: increasing an agent's operational authority also increases the potential consequences of poorly specified objectives, adversarial inputs, and unforeseen edge cases. Giving an autonomous system access to financial resources therefore changes the problem from "Can the agent perform the task?" to "Can the agent reliably determine which actions should be performed?"

That makes Pion an interesting research direction. A platform that enables many independent experiments could provide considerably more evidence about the practical limits of autonomous agents than a small number of carefully controlled demonstrations.

The ultimate measure of success, however, should not be whether an agent can technically operate a company. It should be whether the resulting organization can make sound decisions, remain economically viable, respond appropriately to unexpected conditions, and produce value for actual customers.

In other words, autonomy is not merely the ability to act without a human in the loop. It is the ability to exercise useful judgment when the correct action is not already specified.

Two days in a row, my full Powerwalls became part of the virtual power station. We did have an outage, because of a branch or something on our rural road. Otherwise, disaster averted. Hurray for batteries.

If you cared about the little guy, you'd oppose a union that's going to accelerate them losing their jobs.

The future is EVs and driverless cars. Tesla's cabs are $~8 per ride, not even half that of an Uber, and you don't have to tip them!

Who is gonna want to to pay for an Uber when they top $30 per 15 minute ride to pay for union demands, or the company becomes so inflexible they can't make changes without union permission?

that is actually the truth. We remove the "dangerous" elements to protect the rest. The problem lies when the worst distill into absolute anarchy. Do you believe in capital punishment ? That is truly the only way to remove the worst elements from society. While in theory I support it. I would not want to be the one deciding who gets the "final solution". Things like that seldom work out :(.

Only if we allow private equity to run for profit prisons. We tried it in Arizona. It went badly. The federal government now runs our prisons because our state legislators will not pay for or hire Dr's in prisons. We allowed a company to run them. They did, right into the ground and criminal proceedings.

AGI is a myth just as AIs capable of passing the Turing Test was a myth.

AIs are improving and we must prepare for the consequences of AGI now.

Have your head examined, please.

So we have finally reached the point where we need an AI foundation model to tell us what is hiding in the shadows on the Moon. Somewhere, a crater is now worried about being classified.

Jokes aside, this is actually one of the more sensible applications of these models. The interesting part is not that it is "AI," but that it combines data from multiple instruments and resolutions. Humans are pretty good at looking at one dataset and finding something interesting. We are considerably less good at mentally registering tens of thousands of observations from nine instruments and noticing that three seemingly unrelated measurements line up over the same patch of lunar real estate.

The open dataset may be even more valuable than the model. If researchers can reproduce the results, retrain it, and compare it against conventional geological analysis, we might eventually learn whether the model is actually discovering things or merely becoming extremely good at finding things that look like whatever was in its training data.

And if it helps locate lunar ice deposits, that has some pretty obvious practical value. Water on the Moon is not just something to drink; it potentially means oxygen, hydrogen, fuel, and considerably less stuff that has to be launched from Earth. Finding it before we start digging is probably a worthwhile use of compute.

Of course, the first scientist to publish "AI discovers giant face on Moon" is going to have some explaining to do.

Around 2029 we'll see that a ride is available for $16 or $31 with a driver.

Rider's choice. I'll guess it goes about 80/20.

When they start demanding higher wages, they'll ensure their own demise at the hands of driverless cars. Probably whey this got through a state congress so notoriously hostile to the little guy.

And though you might think it rather off odd of me...

Prompt: Return the word no.
No.