but they can't do anything about AI?
They can. There's no order Trump can sign to stop them legally- which is why that's not what he did. The headline makes it seem like that, but it didn't.
What it does is much more insidious. It orders the Government to engage in lawfare and withholding of whatever funds are considered legal to withhold to any state that doesn't follow the Executive policy on AI.
i.e., he can't legally order them to stop "doing something about AI", but he can take their money away until they decide it's not worth it anymore.
It's PR and fodder for the fan club. It's plainly illegal
It's almost certainly legal.
On what grounds do you think it's illegal?
and yet another slide into corruption as the AI movement loots treasuries and pockets, while producing nothing but high-wattage goo.
Oh- you're a doomsday preacher on the corner of Hollywood and Vine- got it.
EOs like this shouldnt be worth the price of the paper they are written on
Common misconception about EOs going on here, I think.
You can't write an EO that declares State law null and void. That's not a power that the President has.
You write an EO to direct the Executive departments to do something.
In this case, he has ordered the relevant agencies to engage in lawfare and grant withholding to people who don't cowtow to the will expressed in the EO.
I.e., he's avoid setting a regulatory rule. Instead he's setting up a taskforce that tries to pummel the State into submission by withholding cash and suing it for anything it can think of.
Legal, but pretty fucking gross.
I'm not sure what the point of comparing to a parachute is, when you don't have a reason to control a parachute with a computer in the first place.
And if you do, because you're NASA or some other space agency, may I recommend not using an LLM for that purpose.
Of course since you don't want to either A) have your LLM function as an parachute (very bad!), or B) have your parachute controlled by an LLM, certainly that means they're useful for everything, right?
My wife once told me that she couldn't put the TV up on the wall without help. Divorced her on the spot.
Of course not everything has to be for work though either.
This is your key insight. I'd add DamnOregonian's corollary to it, though: Not all work requires a model capable of producing superintelligent output. Sometimes-bordering-on-kinda-dumb-but-also-freakishly-skilled-in-certain-ways is also perfectly sufficient at times.
He who is content with his lot probably has a lot.