No, they're arguing there's ways to use their software to commit an illegal act, which is true of literally anything.

I can't imagine anyone making the argument that using AI tools to rewrite code in another language removes the copyright.

Not exactly, because the amount of stearates that came off the gloves would be fairly random, so there's no way to apply a general correction. You might not even know what kind of gloves they used in the experiment!

That doesn't mean you throw out the results, but you maybe mark those results and say there was potential factor unaccounted for and the results needs to be replicated.

So how come you can build a custom kit car and drive that legally? Maybe the Chinese can sell their cars here as kits comprising a car and a decal that you stick on yourself.

The CEO of Ford bought a Chinese EV (Xiaomi SU7) and after driving it for 6 months said he "never wants to give it up". Check out Marques Brownlee's review of it. Not cheap at $40K, but apparently equal in quality to US cars at $75-100K price.

The gold-standard tasteful way to handle stuff like this is cast a friend of the original actor. An example is Jon Lovitz replacing Phil Hartman on Newsradio.

I agree they could possibly get away with AI since it's being driven by his cast mates, but I don't think they'd try it.

It's an interesting journalistic debate. On the one hand their job is to report, not to help people stay anonymous.

But Banksy is part performance art, and his anonymity is part of that, by revealing his identity you arguably destroy the art work.

I feel like this expose kinda gets forgotten because Banksy was never completely anonymous, the reason he's not really known is that people recognize the anonymity is part of it and they don't want to know who he is.

> Manufacturing will catch up to demand, but we probably will not see the abnormally low prices again that we were enjoying for RAM and hard drives again.

These aren't "abnormally low" - they are market prices that are profitable for the manufacturers. Unfortunately there is currently more demand, from AI, for memory than the industry has capacity for, so those that have longer term purchase agreements, or are willing to pay more will win, and until supply/demand gets back in balance we're going to see higher prices for things like laptops and smartphones.

> The only reason prices would go up is if the supply cannot keep up with the demand.

This may well happen for a while, it is hard to ramp up SOTA chip manufacture very quickly, and the industry is notoriously boom and bust, and the chip companies (incl. memory) have learnt their lesson - they are not going to ramp up as hard as they can (which is anyways limited) to meet a short term demand bubble which they expect will level off.

Zhaoxin (Chinese market)

Maybe some are like that, but have you seen Marques Brownlee's review of the Xiami SU7 ? High end, high quality. Priced at equivalent of $40-45K, and in Marques opinion competitive with anything here at $70-75K point.

Tesla's aren't exactly flawless in this respect either - plenty of reports of fires and recalls like Cybertruck glued-on body panels falling off.

> First they claim this is because of tariffs...but aren't vehicles with final assembly in the U.S. free from most tariffs?

Does that apply any more? It used to be that "made in USA" cars might actually have less actually "made in USA" content than a "foreign" car due to these bizarre cross-border rules, but Trump's tariffs are/were anyways ADDITIONAL on top of pre-existing tariffs, and generally so high that they dominate.

SCOTUS recently declared Trump's tariffs illegal, but Trump responded same day that he would just impose tariffs under a new excuse. Maybe in a years time SCOTUS will shoot that down too, and in the meantime nobody can guess what is going to happen.

> Then, they claim their product is not competitive with Chinese competitors...with a vehicle they were going to assemble in the U.S.? That also makes no sense. Why wouldn't the manufacture it in Asia?

China's level of factory automation is insane, and they have the whole supply chain there which is a huge factor. It may well not be possible for another country to compete unless they can match these advantages, even if based elsewhere in Asia.

You would imagine Honda has been keeping close tabs on Chinese EV developments, but it seems they are making very progress, and I have no idea how long the planning cycle would be for Honda to create whole new lines. Presumably whatever sunk costs they have made sense at the time.

Not in the slightest.

It just shows we have some levers to reduce consumption that we don't normally use.

It doesn't show that we can reasonably use those levers long term, not that those levers are actually sufficient to reduce fuel consumption enough to make up the difference.

It's a very rational response, and certainly impossible for a business to plan when the rules (e.g. tariffs) are changing on a daily basis

Certainly China seems far ahead of everyone, US as well as Japan, in being able to build low-cost desirable EVs.

Of course the tariff playing field is far from level, and Trump is likely to flip-flop on what he's imposing on which country based on what he had for lunch, what presents they've sent him, etc.

It may be that even though China is the low-cost producer than Japan still has an advantage in the US market because Trump is choosing to penalize them less than China, but that can change in a heartbeat and therefore isn't something that it makes sense for a manufacturer to plan around. Even if Trump made some "commitment" to Japan over tariffs, his words are meaningless, as I'm sure the whole world is well aware.

In the meantime, the official goal of tariffs is supposedly to encourage domestic manufacture, but Trump's buddy Musk doesn't seem to be stepping up to the challenge, no anyone else. The car manufacturers have all learnt that it's more profitable to sell fewer expensive SUVs than more entry level cars, and new cars in the US are increasingly becoming a luxury item than many can no longer afford.

What I've often wished for, when driving, is to be able to talk to the map, to update what it's doing - I wonder if this will let me do that, and if so will it be available via CarPlay ?

The sorts of things I'd like to say/ask are:
- please let's make a stop at X
- please go via the highway (H)
- how far to the next gas station/services/etc

> Personally I would be surprised if world models offered anything of value given they operate at such a low level.

You're thinking of the animal approach in the wrong way. Forget all the "world model" type, and just think of it as a predictive model, a near cousin of an LLM, that learns to predict next perceptual input(s) rather than next token form an historically gathered training set.

Let's also note that the input to an LLM really isn't text or symbolic sub-word tokens - it's really the high dimensional embeddings that are created at the input layer...

Now, contrast, or rather compare, this to the animal (let's say human) visually scanning lines of text in book, or street signs or whatever. The input will also be high dimensional embeddings, just ones that originated as visual input, and what-follows-what is exactly the same whether you are learning in real-time or learning from a frozen dataset. Obviously you will learn exactly the same as an LLM would have learnt given the same data frozen as a training set.

So, the animal can do (and we do!) exactly the same as an LLM, but it can also do a lot more, so it's capability is a superset of what an LLM can do.

Finally you should remember that continual learning and human/animal intelligence (AGI) are the two holy grails of AI research, and there are no easy answers, so if you think there are then you should realize you are misunderstanding something. If LoRA was the answer to continual learning, then they'd be using it. If looping the output of a model back into itself (re: your first reply in this thread) was all that was needed for animal intelligence, then we'd already have AGI.