Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:We all know the real reason (Score 3, Insightful) 81

Exactly. The question is however whether they can keep enough stupid money flowing to survive even if they slow down training. Merely running the models is still quite a bit more expensive than what they can charge for it and they lose money on every prompt.

I think we may be seeing the begin of the crash. Nothing is sure, obviously, as this tech has been massively overvalued for several years now bit they still managed to get mountains of more money.

Comment Re:A Mac CPU cannot see encryption key (Score 1) 72

Sure. But there is a thing called an "decryption oracle". Apple can definitely push an update to this specific device that decrypts all the message that the attackers want decrypted and send them back. It may require the user to decrypt something else and then they just use that unlock. Unless the secure enclave directly communicates with the user and asks the user about every individual message, this type of attack is possible.

Also note that this type of attack is well-known to cryptographers and competent users of cryptography. It is not special or obscure or anything.

Comment Re: It's the Wild West (Score 1) 89

What this probably shows is that the guardrail-approach is not working. If they need to massively overblock to keep things out that they think they need to keep out to avoid bad press, then this strongly Impacts, as you say, usefulness. And they would not do that unless they think they have to.

Raw networking and kernel modules are areas that are hard (I have experience with both) and even only having a good lookup tool (which is one of the things LLMs can do, as long as you verify the answers) would be very beneficial. If they block that, they do so because they have not found anything better.

The whole idea of LLM agents and LLMs doing active stuff is not ready for prime-time. Not a surprise, that usually takes 10-30 years (sometimes longer) from the initial demo, and we are now at year 5 or so and this is high-complexity stuff, so probably 10 years will not be enough. And no, throwing a ton of money or effort at the problem does not accelerate things. Sure, you can do some early stunts that way (like going to the moon a few times and then not doing it again for decades, because the tech was not really there and things were done with extreme effort), but getting things to maturity takes time. One thing people generally do not understand, but the history of science and technology and engineering in particular, is clear. There are no real shortcuts and things are moving slowly.

Comment Re:christmas lights (Score 1) 34

Stop with your animism, your magical thinking is the reason you can believe AGI is imminent.

The same stupidity and magical thinking is as old as the first supposedly intelligent machines, like the "Chess Automaton" from 1770 and likely before. At least people back then had the excuse of bad education. These days it is just willful ignorance.

Comment Re:Once again, for the clueless (Score 1) 72

Yes. Any expert and anybody that actually looked at the facts knows that. But these are people that are soo deeply afraid of what other people may think, they are not rational. For a reference, look at the religious fuckups that had to invent a vengeful God that punishes all wrongthink. These people are the same, just without that God but with technology that may even get them there partially. So they go for it and consequences and risks be damned.

Also note that the UK has not had full-blown fascism in newer history. The government there seems to be hell-bent to give its population that experience.
 

Slashdot Top Deals

If it's not in the computer, it doesn't exist.

Working...