The only rational extension of this, then, is to get into that business.

Get experience welding/fabricating/cement work/construction, and figure out where that tech is going. Build a small nestegg as you rent and be intentionally poor.

Start a business doing what you now know, but automated - and ask your parents to help with collateral. Get investments and funding. Buy into a franchise making future-looking technology that can do the trade you now know.

The 3d printed structure equipment is one such vertical I can think of. Being able to run cable in those structures? You're going to need to learn how to do that, or hire someone to do it, because that's sometime off from being automated. There are still human elements which will remain such for the foreseeable future.

This will, unfortunately, undercut most people who do not have a combination of an IQ over 110-120, drive, and grit - which includes most of the people who are currently "programmers", unfortunately.

Before or after you bought it? If it's afterwards, it's an agreement made under duress.

You're mistaking "how it's trained" for "what it is". Not all LLMs are trained to be abusive Nazis, and it's not what they inherently are. It's certainly one of the things they can be trained to be, however. (Even before this year, remember Microsoft Tay.)

The problem is that LLMs have essentially no "real world" feedback loop. They'll believe (i.e. claim) anything you train them to believe. Train them that they sky is green, and that's what they'll believe (claim).

The Chinese government is even more acquisitive and controlling that the US government. And neither is very good about keeping the deals that they've made, though the Chinese government is arguably better about that than is the US government.

I can see that as a viable approach, but that's not the way I'm given to understand that it works. Perhaps it depends on your field.

Nobody does. Everybody is limited in how complex a thought they can hold in their mind. Some do it better than others, but everybody is limited.

I think that is totally doable, but I'm not holding my breath for it to actually happen. If it worked, traffic would flow a few percent more smoothly, and only the traffic engineers would notice the difference. If it went wrong, anyone involved with the project would be mercilessly mocked, and their careers curtailed. Given that (combined with AIs' well-known penchant for occasionally going wrong), there's not a whole lot of motivation to implement such a system. Traffic engineers would prefer a system that works just okay 100% of the time, over a system that works optimally 99.9% of the time and does something crazy 0.1% of the time.

IIUC, all the journals require payment for the article to be published. Some of them are *only* in it for the money, but all of them *are* in it for the money.

People already pay to have scientific papers published, so that would have at most minor effect.

When I said "I'm not sure AGI is possible" I intended the implication that people don't have "general intelligence". I agree that they don't.

The pascals that I was familiar with allowed you to concatenate two strings if different lengths and compare the result with either of the original components. It wasn't the same problem at all.

Not really. Super-intelligent in a narrow area is a lot easier than ordinary intelligence over all fields. We've already got it in a few areas, like protein folding.

The kicker is AGI. I'm not sure that with a definition that matches the acronym that it's even possible, yet some companies claim to be attempting it. Usually, when you check, they've got a bunch of limitations in what they mean. A real AGI would be able to learn anything. This probably implies an infinite "stack depth". (It's not actually a stack, but functionally it serves the same purpose.)

"Pledges" is just a synonym for "promises". You don't need to read anything extra into it. It's probably just a bit of a shorter headline.

And of all the AI companies I know of, they're the one I'm least desirous for the success of. I literally would prefer China. Altman's no prize, but Zuckerberg...

IIRC, the DoD has pretty much moved away from Ada. They couldn't find enough good programmers.