Most likely the next step change in AI improvement will come from the next generation learning from today's LLMs and diffusion models. But not being trained on their output. More likely they will be evaluated by current AI.

AI advancements have a predictable pattern. First we mimic how humans do something, then we use those AIs to evaluate the next generation which learns how to do it without mimicking humans. LLMs have been trained on human output and work by trying to determine what a human would do in any situation. The next generation will most likely learn how to think and speak without ever seeing a word of human generated text. Now that LLMs exist to evaluate their output we have the necessary building blocks to design the generation of AI that can really produce content far better than any human.

We are living in the era of early-to-mid 90s chess engines, where AI learned from human moves and brute forced its way to barely beating the best in the world. It took 10 years from the point where chess engines could compete with top humans players until chess engines were effectively unbeatable. And those unbeatable engines were trained by other AI, not by looking at human games. It got to the point where looking at how humans played would have just made it worse.

That's why they compared it with YouTube shorts, which is basically YouTube's TikTok replica.

I guess you didn't read very carefully. They found a marker that appears 5 years before a diagnosis and also part of the mechanism of smoking and other things causing lung cancer AND potentially how to interrupt it. That's a good bit more than simply finding a well known correlation.

I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.

Since Microsoft doesn't honor their license agreements, why should anyone else?

It's not THAT unlikely that if you have Porsche money, you can afford to get 3 phase service in your home.

I get that there was probably a panicy passenger, but given 4.5 hours to land if they turn around or 4 hours to land if they continue to their destination and nothing but water under them either way, they may have actually prolonged the situation slightly by turning back.

They were half way there. It made no sense to turn around at that point.

Maybe he thought it was off.

Not only did they panic over a poorly chosen Bluetooth device name, they turned around AT or just past the halfway point, apparently to maximize the damage and inconvenience. They could just as well have continued as normal and sorted it out at the destination.

How about perform an exploratory laparotomy just in case you implanted a bomb?

I doubt it rises to that level. The device had a name that happened to be Bomb. Yelling FIRE is a specific communication of a dangerous condition.

The bluetooth name has nothing to do with security. It is more likely that MattsSpeaker is a bomb than the thing named BOMB. Any number of things with no bluetooth or bluetooth turned off are also more likely to be a bomb than the bluetooth thing called BOMB.

In 1971, 'Creeper' proved the concept of a computer virus. Years later, experts were calmly and sometimes patiently explaining to people that you couldn't get a virus from an email.

Then Microsoft threw the weight of it's huge dev team into the effort and finally made the email virus a reality.

Now, 30 years later, LLMs have at last given teeth to "the honor system virus".

I'm not sure if that's true, but it would make sense if it was. Alpha males (ignoring there is no such thing) are the most restricted by laws, because they are the most likely to get their way if there was no enforcement of laws (through the natural law of might makes right). So it shouldn't be surprising that they'd be the least likely to let something slide without getting the police involved to get the same outcome they could have done themselves if the laws allowed them to use their own physical force. "Less alpha" individuals may be more used to not getting their way regardless of the laws, are therefore feel less entitled to get the police involved as quickly.