Rapidly iterating one pixel at a time is how we get video. Dead simple and lots of processing is the secret sauce to much of our modern world

In my company we are keeping junior engineers and getting senior engineer level work out of them as they drive the agents. I still have to kick stuff back but I had to do that with senior engineers too

You somehow know the result before looking at the data that experts expect will take months. Have you considered a role in the Trump administration?

This. Humans across virtually every race, religion, and culture have had FEWER CHILDREN once their economy gets to a certain level. We can speculate all day about why but the decline in fertility as a function of economics is simply an observed fact.

If it were open source and someone cared enough to fork it, then presumably there are open licensed contribution to the repo that Siemens won't own the copyright to.

What happens to those? Can they be taken closed source at all?

This was my thought too. Why did someone mark it troll?

Just to note, the WSL containerisation approach is horrible for anything I/O intensive. WSL 1 had ELF binaries supported by the kernel and ran natively, this is a far superior approach to WSL 2's containerisation when it comes to raw speed.

I benchmarked this a few months ago and it was between 300%-600% slower on raw disk performance I/O.

I'd be interested in the examples of "China lies". People just run it off like it's accepted.

Note that, to be a lie, it has to be deliberately wrong, not just wrong and/or ignorance. It can be quite difficult to prove intent. Even so, something to argue against, or even agree with, would be reasonable.

Try asking it what day it is today, or tomorrow...

I use qwen frequently, and that is the thing it gets wrong most often (AFAIK), or similar, like when it says, next Monday, the 29th...ie can't even check its dates on a calendar ðY

Of course, like the western AIs, qwen also doesn't work in mainland China - not supported. It has a m/l specific version, of course, but, for me, at least, I wanted one that works everywhere.

Maybe I'll test Kimi on this...but I guess this whole AI technology is segregated. Sigh.

Reference required for...all of above...

It sounds a lot like a load of BS to me, and, at best "pot calling the kettle black"...though I don't know who the pot is in this case, so shrug. Just the ramblings of a brainwashed sinophobe, maybe.

It's not real. It's not intelligent. It's a probability matrix - a very good one, but that's what it is. When people say they 'convinced it', what actually happened was they started using language recognisable in a subset of the model's training data and the model responded using probability with data from that same subset as it's statistically closer.

In this case, they used language which is the kind floating around with people negative to AI, and so the AI constructed a sentence using data in their "negative to AI" section. Nobody got convinced of anything. It's very impressive, but it's 'just' a probability matrix.

I was listening to this on BBC news on my commute this morning (in the UK). They said it attacked a Medicare site, which is the Australian national health system. My immediate thought was "ah, so someone in the US asked it to do something with Medicare records and forgot to limit it to just the US then". So off the AI trots to do exactly what it was asked to do - "collect records on Medicare', without any regard to geography at all. Hence this 'hack'.

I mean, I'm just guessing so that opinion is worth what you just paid for it. It does sound plausible to me though.

"there is no right or expectation of privacy in public"

I agree (UK so different laws, but the principle is the same). However I increasingly feel this needs to be revised somehow. I'll admit up front I don't have all the answers here, but just intuitively it feels to me that this principle predates the era of cheap, automated mass surveillance whether government or private.

In the UK, privacy is protected via the Human Rights Act and UK GDPR. It provides for some level of protection, but it really seems to me that specific rules to address this kind of blanket recording need to start coming in. The definition of 'commercial', for instance. Is it commercial use if I record you on my glasses and then post it to Youtube? Arguably yes, since YouTube is a company and derives revenue from that. Same for Meta. But it's very, very far from clear to me if that claim has enough weight to prevail. A specific set of rules to address what is essentially a new phenomenon needs to be brought in.

Recording is not new. Photographing is not new. But the ease and scale via which it can be achieved, manipulated, tracked...that is new.

Do you have the code for the compiler, and compile that yourself too?...and ditto for THAT compiler? All the way down...

This is why some of us still use cash and Monero