Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

xAI

x.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 271 posts

Re: xAI

#61

Post by paxys »

chasing wrote: post #45

What Musk needs to do is fund smart people to do interesting stuff and then get out of the way. If that's what this is, great. If it's just another opportunity for him to do something high-profile and half-baked to massage his weirdly fragile ego: Ugh.

> What Musk needs to do is fund smart people to do interesting stuff and then get out of the way.

So, OpenAI? The problem is always that his ego gets in the way. He wants to be recognized as the messianic figure behind AI, but the ship is sailing ahead without him. Hence all the new efforts (Tesla AI robot, XAI) and grandiose promises ("understanding the nature of the universe").

Re: xAI

#62

Post by bhouston »

efields wrote: post #55
Animats wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may be drugs. Until he publicly outed himself as a druggie, his decisions were generally good. Since then, not so good.

What?

At least Ketamine: https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-ketamine-use-secur... and also pot (Joe Rogan podcast from a couple years ago.)

Wouldn't be surprised if he is also microdosing LSD, it is quite popular right now in high-tech circles (see: https://www.wsj.com/articles/silicon-valley-microdosing-keta... ), but I don't think someone has accused him of that yet.

Re: xAI

#63

Post by morkalork »

Animats wrote: post #51
vippy wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I'm not going anywhere near this. Musk had the world beating a path to his door, until he outed himself as a petulant man-child and a fascist.

It may be drugs. Until he publicly outed himself as a druggie, his decisions were generally good. Since then, not so good.

Its a recent thing though isn't it? Didn't he just start getting into them when he hooked up with grimes?

Re: xAI

#65

Post by uoaei »

"The true nature of the universe" is either about cosmology or it's (wrongly) about ontology/metaphysics. Both seem like interesting pursuits. Fitting cosmological models to massive datasets from astonomical observations seems laudable and not entirely out of reach (one approach: space- and time-localized NeRF fitting on the entire visible universe accounting for relativistic effects). It would be strange to describe discovering ontologies as learning the "true nature" of things unless you were a hardcore idealist/Platonist, but that seems more appropriate given the starting points afforded by the current state of the field and the hype that surrounds LLMs.

Re: xAI

#66

Post by bozhark »

Animats wrote: post #51
vippy wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I'm not going anywhere near this. Musk had the world beating a path to his door, until he outed himself as a petulant man-child and a fascist.

It may be drugs. Until he publicly outed himself as a druggie, his decisions were generally good. Since then, not so good.

Drugs aren’t why people are shitty.

They’re shitty before the drugs too.

Re: xAI

#67

Post by blitz_skull »

I just want to see a definition of done. What the hell does it even mean to “understand the true nature of the universe”?

What makes us think we can understand it?

How would we know if we could or could not?

Re: xAI

#68

Post by PeterStuer »

I remember grasping the 'true nature of the universe' some night in a bar called 'the professor' in the late 80's. No, I'm not joking or being sarcastic. I wasn't on any substances besides a mild dose of alcohol.

I just whish I could remember/ relive it rather than the tenuous grip of that moment I still preserve.

Post reply on HN