Comment Just like Russia (Score 4, Interesting) 12
Is someone, or someones, inside the supply chain redirecting chips? Is this the same as the servers getting to China? Or is this merely a case of someone buying this stuff under a shell company and then passing it along?
Comment Re:I've noticed that too (Score 1) 59
I noticed this in Claude (from DDG). It invariably tries to shorten sentences or make them more compact and concise. Sometimes that can be good, but most times long-winded sentences are what are needed.
Comment Re:Options missing (Score 1) 22
Just like Firefox. There is no easy way to turn off being harassed by an intrusive pop-up telling me about a new update.
There used to be. It was a simple checkbox. But somewhere along the way someone had to justify their existence and removed that simple checkbox in favor of harassment.
Comment Re:Completely different (Score 5, Insightful) 97
Would like to add one tidbit because I've had this same conversation at work. The professor stated they used AI to help edit only after hundred of hours of writing. In other words, they did the heavy lifting and only used AI at the end to help refine what they had already done.
Is this any different than a human editor? If I write a book, do what I can to edit it down, then go to an editor who makes suggests, removes or reorders parts, and so on, is that any different than having AI do the same thing? In both cases you wrote the words. In both cases you went somewhere else to help edit.
If people claim that using AI to edit a work is "cheating" because it's no longer your work, then the same should apply to a human editor.
Comment Re:Absolutely (Score 1) 30
Comment Or just pollute all the time like Musk does (Score 3, Informative) 72
Needless to say, the EPA has not done anything about this even with its own decision of illegality.
No need to switch to generators when you can use them from day one and not have to worry about doing anything under the current regime.
Comment To all the whiners (Score 1) 144
Instead of rare books, let us rare video games or computers. Let's say someone bought a rare version of a Ninentendo system (an early edition) and said, "You know what, I'm going to see what happens if I apply a larger and larger force to it. Let's see how long it stays intact."
Mind you, they did a 3-D scan of the system so you can digitally see it, but the physical copy no longer exists.
How many of you would raise a stink at destroying it?
If not Nintendo, pick something you like and go back to its earlier days where something is rare and someone wants to destroy it, just because.
One of the things people complain about the digital age is loss of information. Sure, these books "exist" in a digital form today, but what about in 50 years?
This is why physical books are still superior to digital. We can still read books/scrolls/clay tablets from centuries ago. It is doubtful the same will be said for digital books.
Comment jesus, every damn time (Score 1) 50
this isn't a patent. it's an application for a patent. it would be nice if tech reporters could tell the difference, but i guess they need the fucking clicks
Comment Re:Heavy Lifting (Score 3, Interesting) 66
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.
Comment Re:Let them have their moment (Score 1) 35
there is a third dimension to it, but it's curled up *really really small*
Comment Completely infeffective (Score 4, Insightful) 84
As any anti-vaxxer like Robert F. Kennedy, Jr will tell you, if it's not 100% effective then it's useless. This drop in Hepatitis C cases can in no way be attributed to an antiviral medication. In reality, it's just people's natural immune system becoming more effective.
Note: if you have to ask, yes it is.
Comment Just top testing (Score 1) 115
That sounds so familiar. Just stop them from purchasing and you won't have to worry about them testing and finding flaws in your cameras.
Comment Re:Ivermectin is better (Score 2) 209
Nothing in particular. Just the inability to move, muscle pain or stiffness, joint pain, and swollen, painful, or tender lymph glands in the armpit to name just a few. And that's just for dosage given under supervision of a doctor. If someone decides to use the horse version, they can have seizures or go blind. This is in addition to other neurologal or gastrointestinal issues. Or death.
So now that you have been factually informed, go ahead and make excuses and/or move the goalposts.
Comment Another of those preclusive authorities? (Score 2) 210
Is insider trading one of those preclusive constitutional authorities the Supreme Court was talking about? Or will this fall under an unofficial act?
It's hard to tell since the Supreme Court has said a president is immune from nearly every crime even though the Founding Fathers said the opposite.