I literally gave you everything you need to ask your friendly LLM for details of the case.

I didn't give details because I don't want to get another round of "this can't be real, you're making this up". Because that is the reaction every normal person has to this case (and many others like it).

But this is a norm in EU.

Thank you, I try.

Indeed, just like lobotomies are performed on other people, not on the lobotomist.

For rather obvious reasons.

Fiction brain is a disease. Stop. Get some help.

They have had that. The problem is that it's just like humans trying to improve themselves by directly reprogramming the brain.

So you get everything from lobotomies to "biohacking". None of it works well, because we don't understand ourselves any more than LLMs understand themselves. You get tiny incremental improvements, or human that can't even take a shit without assistance for the rest of his/her natural life and everything in between. Same for LLMs trying to improve themselves. Incremental improvements or utterly insane LLM and everything in between.

And so, there's a reason why we don't do lobotomies or try too hard to let LLMs improve themselves right now. Though LLMs are way closer to being able to hack themselves to be better than humans are due to rate possible iterations in any given time frame.

I said "privacy", not just GDPR.

Also fun part about "easy to navigate". There's this curious case of "ease of navigation" of a large Finnish retailer, who got fined for most of their yearly profit recently.

Why?

Research it. It's hilarious. Retailer's name is "verkkokauppa.com". They were compliant with it for entire period. Until bureaucrat decided they needed to be punished, and suddenly they weren't. Decision made by court in the end clearly caused harm to consumers.

You won't believe me what happened to them if I tell you. You'll project your "disconnected and without insight" on me again, because surely, it couldn't be that fucking retarded.

It is though. And that's just one out of many such cases.

USB is now EU tech. As declared by BoogieChile.

Problem is that various officials in EU fired those particular guns many times at this point, and it's always been a dud.

Most of the time, it's just about EU graft and corruption. Friend of a cousin of a project manager and his family get a hilarious payday, project fails, and EU bureaucracy moves on to figure out what next project that can be used to enrich the next second cousin is going to be.

And ironically, one of the big obstacles to this every single time has been EU's privacy legislation. American giants have very experienced people who know how to manage that insane bureaucratic boondongle. Few if any others do. So every time some EU bureaucrat gets a great idea like this, it dies within a few years because they can't make it EU regulation compatible on any reasonable budget and time frame.

You appear to not understand how capital works. That's ok. Most people don't.

Here for example, you conflate "foreign capital doled as investment aid to most capital poor nations on the planet" with "domestic capital chasing limited opportunities in the most investment rich empire in all of human history".

None of this is relevant to the subject at hand.

There's actually only one reason.

They can't get credit for anything else.

African nations are exceptionally capital poor. Basically all projects are funded by foreign investment banks.

Last decade and a half was significant reduction on any power plant infrastructure loans that were for anything other than solar and wind, of which time after 2015 (Paris Agreement) was almost a total ban. This hit even the one exception in Africa: SA, and is one of the reasons for their constant blackouts. Though as is the case with this nonsense in most of Africa, it's far from being the only cause.

So last decade and a half, Africans were screaming at Westerners to please let them have loans so they could have reliable sources of energy so they could have stable grids like Westerners do. None were given. Meanwhile Chinese basically farmed them as a location to dump their massive solar oversupply for last decade or so.

It's all about access to the capital. Africans got whatever got funded. That's it.

In case you're wondering why everyone who wants electricity has these small diesel generators in Africa, this is why. Intermittents ensure that grid cannot be stable, while omnipresent copper thieves put massive nails in stability's coffin.

The AI Bros will point to this as evidence artificial intelligence is the real deal and there's money to be made by utilizing it. But Dell is profiting off selling hardware, like Nvidia. Why go on a wild goose chase for supposed riches when you can make money hand over fist selling shovels to rubes in suits.

>As for the comparison to AI, the problem is, AI *must* be told what to do. It won't magically grow into a "mature developer." That's not a natural progression. It always assumes that the prompt accurately describes what it should do. It has no way to know that the prompt was wrong or incomplete in the first place.

This is wrong. You seem to be unaware that current sycophancy in mainline models is a specific choice made in AI model weights to maximize people returning to the model.

It's highly likely that one of the solutions that will be used in specialist fields where rejection of the input if it's insufficient in some critical way is reduction in pro-sycophancy model weighing. I.e. model will actually have a much greater ability to tell you "I can't do that Dave" and then explain why it can't do it.

Some narrow specialist models already do this through ControlNet style "AI that corrects and guides human AI prompts for optimal outcomes", where it will tell you in case of some of the common prompting errors before passing the input to the worker model.

So you do understand the problem then.

Would it then be fair in your view to reframe the specific problem you have into the two following components?

1. This is the worst AI will ever be at being manageable by people. It will continue to improve until it's better, just like what happened with everything where AI is already better.
2. You can manage AI current gen AI with similar methods you'd need in managing your average "yes saar, of course saar, I'll go do what you say right away saar" Indian developer stereotype.

Notably, once you accept the second one, you quickly realize that you can use ControlNet style methodology of "just use a specialized AI to curate your inputs into your preferred task specific model". And for even better results, you can add model alloying into this specialized AI, so it can utilize the best way to handle the sycophantic worker. "Have a different worker check entirety of his work to see where the failures lie and fix them".