Often they're not even doing the design themselves but Google has never claimed to be a hardware company, their branded phones were always and openly, someone elses, right back to the Nexus series.

Of course they realise that... Which is why Palantir and AI have been blamed already, they know that they can't keep relying on the Republicans to keep them out of trouble so they're laying the groundwork to make sure when heads start to roll, it's not their head. That way they can retire and get a cushy private sector gig before the investigation even finishes let alone any kind of war crimes tribunal (which the US will still protect them from).

It's not just desperation but also greed. Especially in countries where workers don't have many rights and a lot of costs like the US.

Greed is the most successful attack vector in most scams. The temptation of more money tends to blind even some of the most astute people, especially in a mercenary culture.

It could be worse, Consumer.

This is pretty much the last media company Disney doesn't own... although it is owned by Larry Ellison so it's not really that much better.

Remember to consume mindlessly Consumer, and it can get worse, it can always get worse.

This is the elephant in the room that no-one wants to talk about, especially those who are benefitting from it.

Social media isn't just targetting kids, they're targetting everyone and it's not just the under 16 who are vulnerable. Loads of adults are as well, in particular the elderly. Social media is radicalising a large number of older people as well. If we're going to restrict SM for younger people, we should also be doing it for the older people who are just as susceptible to propaganda and misinformation, in many ways, more susceptible.

Top Of The Pops must have made many enemies over the years (and not just because of Jimmy Saville).

Jokes aside, this is largely an American problem as companies there are permitted to be as abusive as they like.

If a store tried to force me to use their app and refused to take an order via their web site they'd lose an absolute shitload of business (not just from me). Same with banks, however there are laws with banks that mean they must meet standards of accessibility and forcing people into a proprietary app is going to violate a few rules there. My bank still uses a OTP sent via SMS.

Obviously the long term solution is legislative, but good luck with that given you keep voting in corporate shills.

In the US, in order to file win a lawsuit, one needs standing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_(law), which essentially means one needs to show one has been harmed by the action in question or one is specifically given permission to sue by a specific law. I'm not a lawyer, but I'm having trouble seeing how the people suing can argue they have enough harm that is a form that matters that they'll be able to persuade a judge they have standing.

I'm not sure any of those have money at that level. Aaronson in the past when he was doing quantum computing work refused to take payment or stock from quantum computing companies, so I'd be shocked if he has any money. As for monetary concerns, Hinton explicitly quit his well-paying job at Google so he would be free to talk about AI risk. So the narrative here is the exact opposite. And when the companies talked about deliberately slowing AI growth, stock in AI related companies went down, which undermines the idea that this is anything about their investments. But there's also a serious problem here if someone like Coxon can be dismissed as not having enough knowledge or experience, but people who have been involved in the industry for a long time can be dismissed because they may have financial ties. So can absolutely anyone be dismissed as irrelevant, either lacking in expertise or being too tied in to the industry?

I'm not sure what an hour memory here means, since context windows are measured in tokens. Even six months ago, LLMs could think for well over an hour before producing an output.

This seems odd at multiple levels. First, the people in the foundation labs if anything have more of an idea what is happening than the general population. They are seeing how models are made, what they contribute, and how they go run off the rails. I'm also puzzled by the claim that we're not at the exponential. Two years ago, AI systems could barely do AMC and AIMIE problems, basic high school math contests. Then the AI got to be good enough to do well on Putnam results. Then, early this year, AI got to be good enough to solve multiple open unsolved math problems, including Erdos 1196 https://www.erdosproblems.com/1196 , the Unit Distance Conjecture https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.20695 and many others, and the trends there are just continuing. That's one field, but it is one where the standards are most objective about what is happening. That certainly looks like exponential growth. I'm also puzzled by seeing the labs cannot get the AI to improve themselves is a good standard. From the perspective of a lot of people who are concerned, once that's happening, it is likely too late.

What you mean here is you agree with Yann. But the point is that lots of people who are as qualified as Yann, disagree. So if, as in your first comment, your primary problem with Coxon is lack of experinece, you should find this situation alarming. Worse, your complaint about Coxon was lack of lab experience, but in your new comment you object to people being too deep in the labs to be objective. This leads to the weird situation where no one is in a position to be relevant to listen to.

It is possible that LLM tech has its limits. But people were saying it was hitting its limit 4 years ago, and 3 years ago, and 2 years ago, and a year ago. 4 years ago, people who were saying LLMs were limited would not have predicted they'd be solving unsolved math problems. All those predictions turned out to be wrong. Why should saying it now be more likely? And what if you are wrong here?

So if the concern is these need to come from someone from a company not run by Altman, then we already have that. The OP is about that. And we've had containment breaches reported by Anthropic also. We also had a smaller scale but similar problem reported by an independent security group running an open-weight Kimi. You don't need to trust Sam Altman or anyone associated with him here.

A flyover isn't the problem here. The statement is.

If you want to dismiss Coxon feel free, but he isn't the only one in the article. And outside the article, we have a lot of people who are concerned who are hard to argue aren't experts. Geoffrey Hinton and Yoshua Bengio both got Turing Awards for their work in Deep Learning. (The third who got it is Yann LeCun who isn't worried at all, but Hinton and Bengio is 2/3.) Similarly, Scott Aaronson, who wasn't even that worried about this a few years ago is now highly concerned. Aaronson is one of the world's leading experts in computational complexity, who discovered the algebraization barrier among other things, and whose work lead to the AI watermarking systems. Aaronson just wrote this essay https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=10062. So sure, go dismiss Coxon, but it doesn't impact remotely all the others who are clear experts and are sounding an alarm here.

What needs to happen to decide these aren't PR campaigns and are actual warnings? What would need to occur? Knocking out a power grid? Hacking the Pentagon? Wrecking with air traffic control and making planes crash? I ask in part because when these incidents started happening two months ago, people said that they were just PR and that if they were real we'd start seeing more of them and that seems to be exactly where we are, and yet these are still getting labeled as PR campaigns.

The original quote they are riffing on is "The beatings will continue until morale improves." Essentially this is a variant of the "make a threat, but in a joking fashion, but really functionally a threat" sort of thing that dangerous and abusive people will do. Trump uses versions of this all the time, and it isn't surprising that Hegseth and his people have picked up on this. I'd call this another warning sign about fascism but given everything else that's going on, including a grossly illegal war in Iran, Trump functionally threatening to undermine the upcoming election, and Trump having removed generals and other higher-ups in the military that he sees as insufficiently loyal (read, more likely to actually follow the law and morality when given an illegal order), and this incident becomes almost part of the rounding error.

Yep, pretty much this.

When you have a physical datacentre, you take backup off site in case the site fails, when you're in the cloud you're really just in one physical location unless you're paying through the nose for co-location.

"Cloud" has pretty much taken the LCC (Low Cost Carrier, A.K.A. Budget Airlines) model to compute and Amazon is the Ryanair of that world. Sure, they advertise a £19 flight to Magaluf but want a seat that isn't shit, pony up, want to take luggage, gonna cost you, don't want to take the red eye flight from "London" Isle of Skye airport... you get the idea and before you know it that £19 flight is a £190 flight. Amazons price structure is the same, cheap headline price, what you actually pay is much, much higher.