Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:What I'm reading (Score 2) 50

Why did you not list their lack of profits? Nobody cares about revenue growth, it looks impressive but is made up nonsense full of circle jerk deals among AI companies. Investors care about ROI and don't like capex unless there's a big payday coming very soon.

Here's a better number: Anthropic announced their first ever operating profit just ten days ago for Q2. Very suspicious timing given the IPO. And interestingly the profit claim happens to coincide with a compute discount for said Q2 from Elon. No discount for Q3+Q4. Elon has to make his profit claims.

Like I said: Circle jerk all around.

Comment Re:What I'm reading (Score 1) 50

Google and Anthropic are perfectly able to build their own compute-centers, but it may not be economically a good idea at this point. Remember, the AI hype is dying and the investors are starting to smell a rat. Leasing GPUs from Elon means Google and Anthropic are not stuck with tons of hardware they can't monetize in the future. If things go bad, they just stop paying for access and Elon is left holding the bag.

Comment Re:Or... (Score 1) 214

It's important to distinguish the model from the generated sequence dynamics. The "model" (in the traditional scientific sense) is a fixed function of the input data. It cannot improve itself, except when the scientist replaces it. But that's not improvement, that's revision.

Most regular people don't understand the word model, and think it refers to their interaction with the tool. That can indeed evolve, in the same way that if you repeatedly run an input output loop with a given transformation, and add some random perturbations (aka user control), you will get a trajectory that evolves. It will probably converge to some fixed point, but that could take a long time to detect by users, who think it's evolving before their eyes.

Comment Re:AI very actively used for evil (Score 1) 44

Ask yourself what AI models actually do? They *mimick* what humans have been doing themselves. Things like writing sentences, drawing pictures, collaging photographs, collaging movies. But without ever having built-in attribution mechanisms. So it looks novel but never is. It's just a compression model of real life data artefacts, generating short random samples.

And now ask yourself what the obvious killer app is for a human output mimicking system? A system that allows the owner to pretend some human did something. There was never any other plausible outcome.

Comment Re: Capitalism wins again. (Score 3, Interesting) 206

No ownership implies no market exchange mechanism. That was a direct response to the OP's "markets existed before capitalism". They didn't, because exchange is tied up with ownership. Once ownership is agreed, you have capitalism. It literally is synonymous with ownership of the means of production. Lands, water wheels, slaves, you name it. If it can be sold, somebody owns it. And if it can be exchanged legally, somebody owns it.

Do you own a shovel or a chicken? Congratulations, those are means of production. You're a capitalist!

Slashdot Top Deals

There are new messages.

Working...