Apparently unlike his dad, he thinks Iran should have built nukes long ago.

Seems like Israel and the US are determined to prove him right about that.

It's also a bit rich to say, "This is publicly available, you can read this, but you're forbidden from learning anything from it."

Bear in mind, large laguage models are often trained in a single pass these days. This means that the model looked at the documents once, and updated its weight imperceptibly. If it's capable of repeating something verbatim from that, it's only because it's model of the world was already so good from all its other training data, that what was in the Britannica document was extremely predictable. In other words, that there was almost no additional information there.

And that's as expected from an encyclopedia! If there's anything surprising in an encyclopedia, that's a bad sign.

I think the main thing people worry about isn't any specific identity stuff, but simply that you'll be at the mercy of people who could and would hurt you, with total impunity, if they knew what you thought about them.

People have literally been abused for poking fun at the vice president in social media.

Same reason I won't visit Thailand, the only difference being that the king who they will harm you for criticizing, is a lot less in your face obnoxious (let alone murderous) than the US one.

Side effect? Seems like it's the main product. "Own the libs" or something.

People embraced EVs. Just as long as by people, you mean not your average Ethiopian, but the ones making decisions in Ethiopia.

And so? That's how it works with most things everywhere. If you're bothered by how the decisions by people with money and power influence regular people's decisions, I suggest you have bigger fish to fry than EVs in Ethiopia.

I don't think people like this person or Timnit Gebru are necessarily right. But any person hired as an "ethics expert" can't be taken seriously until they've quit at least one job in protest.

Trump? As if the pressure to end anonymity on the internet doesn't have pan-elite support? Last I checked the current governments of Denmark, UK and Australia weren't very Trump aligned, yet they p push chat control legislation as if their lives depend on it. "It's because we don't have enough information control that we have Trump!" is a sentiment you'll hear over and over again in neoliberal spaces.

Trump is in his dotage, as Kim put it. I'm sure he wants control too, but right now he's mostly about controlling his bowels. Whatever he does someone else decided.

Why? If any coins moved at all (bold assumption) it was no doubt into accounts controlled by the owners. "Oops we accidentally gave away $40 billion, that totally happened and we're not crypto scammers trying to promote ourselves!"

Promotional campaign, yeah I'm sure. I'm sure they had 40 billion worth of bitcoin lying around and managed to transfer it to actual other bitcoin accounts without anyone noticing.

Obviously I support the ban but what you said is not true and the people who chose to live near an airport did so with the knowledge they would be buying affordable homes in exchange for the tradeoff.

They probably didn't know about lead emission from avgas, and even the neurological effects of lead they're unlikely to know very well. Lower land prices near airports, to the degree that's a thing, are probably more about noise.

Keep in mind that at this point, if you did bad things with Epstein, your best bet is to draw attention to the noise. Yes, there's damning things in there, but if you can keep the public's attention on a phoned in tip from a crazy person, you can ride it out.

Also, it's undoubtedly true that Epstein fell out with a lot of people when he went down, and did his best to take them down with him. That includes Trump and Gates. That does NOT mean Trump and Gates are innocent, but things like e.g. the "short route home" Larry Nasar letter are not good evidence. We should look for claims which corroborate each other and align with externally verifiable facts (e.g. that he was that on that day, or that someone did make a police report at the time an account says they did).

Probably straight up LLM role playing games have come further along than last I tried them with AI Dungeon 6 years ago, but either way, that's a bit too freeform for my taste. There's got to be a game in there too, and object permanence + some stuff elaborated in advance.

Yes, the goal with all procedural generation is to surprise yourself, and give your imagination something to play with. Think of all the wonderful stories which have come out of Dwarf Fortress over the years - or from that matter from Minecraft, one of the many games inspired by it.

The same can be said about generative anything. As I see it, AI can be just another kind of procedural generation. Will it be meaningless? Yes, in a sense. But no more meaningless than any other procedural generation. In sandbox games, you supply a lot of the meaning yourself.

There was an obscure genre of games, I don't remember what they're called, but they were text-based "life sims" where you simply were a regular person in some setting, and you got a series of pick-one choices, from a random draw of situations a person in that setting could come into. The game would then track attributes like health, money, attributes etc. possibly affecting which situations and options you might encounter later, until inevitably you die of course. Think like Slay the Spire, but only events, and a lot of them.

The problem was that all the events were handwritten, and to make matters worse the games were often didactic, to "teach" e.g. economic responsibility, or what life is like in some war-torn country. You could of course learn these events and game it by giving the answers the authors approved of. Leading to people telling stories of how their poor character from a war-torn hellhole had three children as a result of rape in war, yet had managed to become a multibillionaire at 35.

So, a game like that, but actually good. Not predictable, not intentionally didactic. Should be possible to do much better with an LLM in the pipeline.

I wouldn't mind AI in a lot of games. There are a lot of games where the stock assets, the quick and dirty pixel art, or even the 5-minutes-in-a-DAW music could benefit from AI replacement. Anything that isn't the selling point of the game anyway.

There is also a huge potential for AI IN games. I like narrative games, I also like open world games, why can't I have both at the same time?

But there's also the thing about quality signals. The best games in the world aren't worth anything if I'll never hear about them, and right now AI assets is justifiably a signal of really bottom-barrel effort, probably even worse than asset flips.

CEOs like that come in two life cycles: the first where they think they can choke Larry Ellison, and the second where they wish they could choke Larry Ellison.