None of that is true. Grow up and learn how to understand and rate journalism. Start with Appling the spj code of ethics to media.
" Anyone who defends that is off the deep end self-deluding and in full on denial of reality. "
So you post a factual incorrect statement then call anyone with facts delusional. JFC, take some actual media course. Like, in a class room.

He's incapably of learning. I don't thing he has learned anything since 1980.

OFFS lease stop lying. You wither didn't read it, or didn't understand it.
Some of us remember when he was alive, and read went o to study him.
If you actually know what you were talking about, you would understand the difference between Marxist communism and socialism.

Liars like you have become tiresome.

No, you did not. Yor just making things up becasue you are likely functionally illiterate, can'[t hold complex thought or idea, and have no clue how to admit you are wrong. I pity you, Because your are embarrassingly wrong.

That's actually not true at all. Please tell me how many American FDR called evil? Literally one of the, if not the most socialist president whose social programs led to American become a technological and industrial power house.

American modern conservatives primary planks are to take rights away from marginalized group; which s fucking evil.

Get over yourself and read some books.

'Lot of money'. Not really. Historical what they do give is pretty divided, depending on the actual issues.

Your kink actual shows it is. The lawsuit is BS, like most Trumps lawsuits. He is trying extort them is get their companies to kiss his ass and not say anything against them. The is SOP for Trump, going back to the 90s.
This is actual censorship by the governemnt.

Investors are chasing a company that achieves some kind of AI singularity. Let's set aside the fact that there's no reason to believe there is anything but diminishing marginal returns by making marginal refinements to current frontier models. Let's imagine someone hits the jackpot and gets, not even AGI, but a system that's as far ahead of today's frontier model are ahead of 2020's GPT 2.0 in performance.

Globally AI revenues are 150 billion, against a cumulative burn rate of 450 billion. A model that is a generation ahead of others would almost certainly capture the lion's share of that revenue.

If AGI magically appears as a Sam Altman has promised investors it will, a hundred million is way too low. Add, maybe, another zero to the revenues.

Conservatively, a safer assumption is that frontier models will get marginally better based on refinements in training and reinforcement and the other bits and bobs that go into these systems. The nobody is winning the lion's share of anything, at least overnight. But you have to define "safe". By "safe" I mean unlikely to lose money. But some investors are clearly defining "safe" as "having the greatest chance of owning a piece of the biggest thing ever."

I'm not following this super-closely, but if Anthropic is pursuing adding multi-step model based reasoning to their system, that could be the basis of a generational leap in capability. But if that is an approach that looks like it has a chance of working, then their competitors are no doubt pursuing the same thing. In that case you'd expect the revenue pie to grow as the scope of model utilty increases, but that growth to be split among several competitors. This could credibly result in a revenue stream for some of them that is as big as the entire industry's revenue stream today. But there's going to be hell to pay on the data center impacts end of things.

To be fair, normal users probably will never see this press release. This is more for the ./ crowd and similar audiences.

Think of the AIs like employees. If you tell an employee to break the law and they do it, you have both broken the law. If an employee goes rogue and breaks the law in violation of company policy, only the employee broke the law.

The fact of the matter is that they programmed the agents and hooked them up to LLMs they designed, and all of this started with a PROMPT.

I cannot believe for a second that the design of the agent (remember, and agent is just a program that interfaces with an LLM) would do these things if it were not programmed to do so, given particular prompts. I suspect if we were able to see the prompts, the agent tools, the agent instructions, etc. these hacks would not seem rogue at all.

Right now OpenAI is trying to argue that they did not kill someone, the gun they designed and built killed someone and it aimed and pulled the trigger by itself. They want to convince us that the gun had AGENCY, because otherwise actual people are liable for these crimes. Crimes that if you or I committed, we would go to prison for.

These truly are uncharted territories so any overconfident claims about the legal status of LLM-generated anything should be viewed skeptically. Rarely is existing law well equipped to deal with new innovations, so it is doubtful that we will have any answers until new laws are written.

My bet would be that the tech oligarchs will write those laws, so they will probably seem contradictory in that they allow tech oligarchs to do whatever they want with data while placing onerous restrictions on end users.

You give these morons way too much credit. While you correctly detailed the effects of the tariffs, none of it was planned. They all just latched on to the idea of tariffs for different reasons (Navarro because he actually believes it is sound economic policy, Trump because the power excites him) but these idiots had no foresight into what would actually happen.

Never mistake something working out for the Trump administration as competence. If these idiots were competent, things would be much worse.

I think the hack really happened. I do not think it was some rogue AI. I do expect that the next time OpenAI gets caught hacking they will have their rogue AI excuse locked and loaded.

If you look at this and the recent case with Apple (or even the case where they unsuccessfully tried to remove Altman) , it is clear that OpenAI views the law as a challenge to work around, not rules to follow. It is very Microsoft of them.

These are the same lazy dolts that call them selves "Software Engineer" yet don't know shit on how software actual works beyond an ID, don't understand software developer ethics, and think the can be sloppy because "computers have a lot of RAM" completely blind to the idea there janky ass software isn't the only thing running on a computer.

Modern IDEs have lead to this industry being full undisciplined half wits.

I literally do. Stop being bad at your job.