Investors are chasing a company that achieves some kind of AI singularity. Let's set aside the fact that there's no reason to believe there is anything but diminishing marginal returns by making marginal refinements to current frontier models. Let's imagine someone hits the jackpot and gets, not even AGI, but a system that's as far ahead of today's frontier model are ahead of 2020's GPT 2.0 in performance.

Globally AI revenues are 150 billion, against a cumulative burn rate of 450 billion. A model that is a generation ahead of others would almost certainly capture the lion's share of that revenue.

If AGI magically appears as a Sam Altman has promised investors it will, a hundred million is way too low. Add, maybe, another zero to the revenues.

Conservatively, a safer assumption is that frontier models will get marginally better based on refinements in training and reinforcement and the other bits and bobs that go into these systems. The nobody is winning the lion's share of anything, at least overnight. But you have to define "safe". By "safe" I mean unlikely to lose money. But some investors are clearly defining "safe" as "having the greatest chance of owning a piece of the biggest thing ever."

I'm not following this super-closely, but if Anthropic is pursuing adding multi-step model based reasoning to their system, that could be the basis of a generational leap in capability. But if that is an approach that looks like it has a chance of working, then their competitors are no doubt pursuing the same thing. In that case you'd expect the revenue pie to grow as the scope of model utilty increases, but that growth to be split among several competitors. This could credibly result in a revenue stream for some of them that is as big as the entire industry's revenue stream today. But there's going to be hell to pay on the data center impacts end of things.

I'm not gambling, I am just trying to predict whether this slot machine will give me three cherries when I spin the wheel.

Is this something you do often?

No, it's pretty much one day a year (but usually several times on that day): spring cleanup (though my smizmar and I call it "truck day" (*)).

It's uncompostable/tainted yard waste, even furniture (if it's in truly horrible shape), and all sorts of other random trashy shit. When it happens, the amount of resulting trash is many times the size of our trash bin or what can even be put on on the curb for "large item pickup." The usual weekly process is overwhelmed and can't handle it; there simply isn't room. So we haul it.

* "Truck day" because I decided paying $72 to rent U-haul's big pickup truck for a few hours is preferable to paying $72k to buy a big pickup truck. And it usually gets used for more than just dumping trash; it's often a large-item shopping day too. (To be next decade's trash? Don't ask!)

Goddamn it! What's with this ticket about the CSV import being broken?!

We need to force these computers to join Psi Corps and obey their rules!

D'oh, but DarkOx, I actually do agree with you on something: the license plates are there and they're visible in public. We don't need Flock to have our privacy compromised; everyone can do it.

We haven't denied our adversaries the capability; we're just trying to regulate their good intentions. That strategy doesn't work.

Flock is the symptom not the disease. People either need to demand anonymity and insist we stop displaying things like plates at all, and actually limit public photography, or just accept we will be tracked everywhere. There is no middle ground to be had.

Indeed. We seem pretty conflicted about that, so we're getting the worst of both worlds.

A lot of people are intentionally commiting crimes of various severity and they don't actually want police to have a more effective enforcement tool

This set of people is dwarfed into insignificance be non-criminals who are also being caught on camera. And the problem with that isn't false positives, it's true positives: non-criminal John Doe's car was spotted at a certain place at a certain time, so let's make that fact available on the market. That way, we can target him with ads, increase his insurance premiums, let his wife's PI know what neighborhood he had lunch in, let assassins when he's home, and let burglars (or his wife's rapist) know when he's not home.

The sheer amount of not-quite-what-consumers-need RAM that is going to be auctioned after the AI companies' bankruptcies will be unprecedented. Remember we're literally talking about an amount equal to what the entire consumer market was using. It's going to be a few years worth of the entire RAM manufacturing industry!

The scale of not-quite-right RAM we're going to see, makes me imagine (warning: red flag for talking out my ass) consumer motherboards specifically made for the mountains of weirdly-packaged cheap-but-fast-as-fuck RAM at hyperscale data center auctions. We'd end up calling them "AI bankruptcy rigs" or something like that. Yes, they'll perform differently (more throughput than you need, more latency than you want), but it still ought to be usable. IGPs usually included, I suspect.

And they will just be a product of the times; ten years later no one would want one and bankruptcy rigs would be seen as odd late-2020s relics; the lemonade from Sam Altman's lemon industry. It would be a dead-end tech. But during those late 2020s? Could be a neat-o opportunity.

Is the person who ignored Pelosi in the room with you right now?

Except tuition is basically free for Mexican citizens while the travel and accommodation certainly will not be. This isn't the US where all schools are outrageously expensive.

Which part of "people are afraid they might get fired if they don't go along with it" do you not get? You seem to think there is no problem with this, but if this is OK, where does it stop? Is it OK to have the highest sales punch the person with the lowest sales? Can they sexually assault them after they are tied to the chair (and why did they have to be tied to a chair if everyone was on board with this)? Where does this assault you think is OK turn into assault you think is not OK?

Except you are ignoring the fact this is your boss telling you this. Sure, maybe you can say you aren't comfortable with it and nothing happens. Or maybe you say you are uncomfortable with it and the boss looks for a reason to fire you because you "aren't a good fit with the culture". If a group of friends do this, it is good fun. When your boss does it, it is assault and workplace coercion.

This "AI" seems to be severely lacking in training, in that no superior/invincible force (e.g. a party simulating law enforcement) showed up and demonstrated the downside to taking certain actions.

Dammit, can't anyone make some stylish cyber-shoes? That looks like shit! Anyone who goes around upskirt-snapping with shoes like that, is going to get laughed out of the ballroom by all the snobs.

"He's not under any compulsion to give a password is he? They had the phone, nothing forced the authorities to trust anything he said....they could have tried forensics like they'd do if they had a safe and tried a safecracker to get in if the suspect didn't want to give the combination."

This is the interesting part to me. He definitely could not be compelled to give them his password (legally). So the fact he offered them a password could be covered under freedom of speech. Depending on what was said, lying to the police can be a crime, especially when it could be considered obstruction of justice. Did they just ask for a PIN and he provided a PIN? Did he say the PIN would unlock the device when it would actually wipe it? It could also show he intended to destroy anything on the device, and while they can't prove there was anything incriminating on the device, it could still be considered evidence as it was data for an investigation. There are a lot of different paths I can see this going down.