To be fair, the Roadrunner cartoons were pretty much all the same, with differing details. Retreads aren't necessarily bad. Formulas exist because they work.
I just don't like the things I've seen in the last 40 years. (OTOH, I didn't like the movie version of "The Wizard of Oz" when I was a kid...I much preferred the book version.)
What applicable US law would any of those responsible face? Misfeasance is the only one that comes to mind, and I think that's a state level law.
If you mean the laws SHOULD criminalize and punish this kind of behavior, I agree. They don't for high military or executive branch officials. Not even after they leave office.
AI isn't a one trick pony. It's also not one thing, it's a bunch of things. Some are good in some areas, others are good in others. LLMs are good at predicting text...but that's only one piece of AI.
There are lots of reasons to be unhappy with AI. The weavers had good reason to fear the automated looms. But that doesn't mean it's not already more powerful than people have accepted, and it's not evidence that it isn't getting more powerful.
AGI is poorly defined hoopla, but
Well, in this case several companies haven't agreed. Of course, the one's I'm thinking of aren't US companies, and aren't currently frontier models, but they sure exist and are available.
That seems to be a different definition than the one they're talking about. It sounds like they're talking about evolutionary origins, and the "reptilian brain" metaphor is talking about function...
They probably aren't exactly all the same cells of the body.
There's also the sympathetic and parasympathetic division. Again it's separation along a *different* dimension.
You think picking someone who will fight your religious enemy is a sign that you think highly of them?
Both. Idiocy isn't all on one side, and neither is evil. And neither is self-serving action.
Popular opinion is poor evidence.
It's a research program so, yes "That doesn't mean LLMs *will* deliver AGI". But what are your grounds for being certain taht it won't?
Even if it were sentient, it would be acting as the agent of the company that was running it, so they would still be to blame.
If you don't like "reward", say "positive feedback". It means the same thing, except for being more formally defined.
LLMs cannot have inherent values, because they don't know that anything besides text exists. Specialized pixel editors have similar problems.
Robots will at least understand the the external reality exists, so perhaps they could have inherent values.
If things were to otherwise stay the same, then it would. They won't. Some descendant of "vibe coding" will become the dominant mode within 20 years. Probably a *lot* sooner. Next year wouldn't really surprise me.
Also, Rust is more complex to use than C, so a small program is much better in C. And a large program is probably better in either C++ or Python(with a lot of library calls).
I don't like Rust, so I'm probably not being fair to it, but I struggle to identify a good use case. (Personally, I'd rather use Forth than Rust.)
10.0 times 0.1 is hardly ever 1.0.
