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

261–270 of 271 posts

Re: xAI

#261

Post by adoxyz »

simondotau wrote: post #250
jeremyjh wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that why they've stopped publicly reporting disengagement data and stopped seeking certification in California?

Sure, you can guess at motives behind two among countless thousands of business decisions. Or you can observe progress of the FSD Beta software released to customers.

I've had access to FSD Beta since like the very first version. It hasn't made any significant progress to be honest. It still does the dumbest most unsafe things at the absolute worst time. In super ideal conditions it may be ok, but for the most part, I don't even try to use it anymore.

Re: xAI

#262

Post by slenk »

simondotau wrote: post #246
slenk wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will be vaporware, like 90% of what Elon offers.

I remember when half the internet was convinced that the Model 3 was vaporware. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13216427

Ok, what about: Solar Roofs (fake roofs at demo https://gotmusked.com/content/solarcity-scam-fake-tiles/)

HyperLoop (Not a new idea, has existed for at least 50-60 years, earlier if you look at the atmospheric train)

Tesla Semi (tell us how much they can actually haul, elon)

Cyber Truck (Delayed, and not really very truck-like https://twitter.com/whatsinside/status/1628569254659518464)

Tesla Roadster

Working AI robot at AI day 2

He said they had full self driving back in 2018.

Spaceships to Mars by 2022 - https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/20/science/elon-musk-starshi...

> "As the name and design have changed, so have Mr. Musk’s overly optimistic predictions for when his spaceship would get to Mars. At Guadalajara, he said the first flight of the Interplanetary Transport System to Mars, carrying cargo but not people, would take off in 2022 and that the first flight with people could launch in 2024."

Most of his promises have no reality backing them

Re: xAI

#263

Post by 3cats-in-a-coat »

saagarjha wrote: post #243
3cats-in-a-coat wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was downvoted first, and then edited it. Way I see it, what I responded to is flamebait, and what I said it common sense. I think it says a lot you're trying to spin it the other way around. No, no one wants to get his comment downvoted and cry about it. That's an assinine misrepresentation. But what could I expect from the permanently offended brigade.

Seems pretty familiar to me. First you post something that you want to say and hope people agree with it. They don't, so you then put something on the end like "the woke liberals disagree with this". Obviously this just makes everyone upset, both the actual woke liberals and people who are not woke liberals but don't care for this kind of drivel, and they downvote you even harder. Then you can point at your comment a…

I'm from Europe, and I neither think in terms of "woke liberals" nor "rightwing conservatives". I speak what's common sense, and of course I notice afterwards what seems obvious in retrospect: certain topics are highly politicized, leading to atypical score (you'll notice I almost have no negative score on my comments).

And yes this makes an impression on me, am I allowed to notice or not?

Re: xAI

#264

Post by jauntywundrkind »

numbers_guy wrote: post #140
stillsut wrote: post #128

> The goal of xAI is to understand the true nature of the universe. People are misinterpreting this as the research goal. No, it's an implicit negation of an ethos - AI Ethics, Trust & Safety, ESG, Politically Correct - that have dominated decision making in product and hiring in tech for the past decade. Whether or not you agree with him, it's hard to deny that Musk is the only one offering researchers an escape fro…

There is literally nothing wrong with ethics in AI, or any other field of science. What is wrong is this woke supremacist nonsense, that some imbecile in Silicon Valley can dictate the truth about the world according to the woke bible, that's where the problem lies. Americans have gotten really intolerant of other cultures and ways of life. There's 8 billion people on this planet, ffs. We don't need the heavy handed…

I worry about centralized control of ai but gee "woke supremacist nonsense" and "woke bible" are incredibly displeasurable shibboleths to run across.

> Americans have gotten really intolerant of other cultures and ways of life.

It's unclear who to me in America is intolerant. I do think there is an extemism, and it scares me, but I don't think we agree on what the scary intolerance is. And I hope I can be clearer & less bitter/extreme/polarizing when I go to discuss the intolerant extremism I see.

> Why should it be censored because the woke cultists find it too icky?

Censoring is a much higher bar for me. OpenAI is just some corporation, doing their thing. They aren't compelled to hallucinate anything on anyone's behalf, just because there's something out there for them to hallucinate off. An entity should be able to pick what it wants to say. And there's a lot of heinous ugly shit on this planet, and in "research journals" of varying levels of quality that would look bad to bayesian parrot back out.

I can't imagine what authority, what the premise would be, to insist private companies or private citizens must ingest & output any content they find. Or any research journal content, for that too is not some clear objective qualifier; many nations & powers would & could exploit that qualifier to get in biased slanted content, if we started demanding peer reviewed journal as being compelled hallucination material.

Re: xAI

#265

Post by jeremyjh »

simondotau wrote: post #253
jeremyjh wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please tell me how I can observe that progress when they have stopped doing any kind of objective public reporting. What are the metrics you deem relevant to track, since not reporting safety data is just a random business decision in your mind?

A count of all-cause disengagements is not "safety data", nor is it "objective public reporting". Much like LoC it can be a signal of progress early on but these days it's ambiguous noise given that many disengagements occur because of reasons other than safety, such as spotting a good place to park moments before reaching a destination. But even where a disengagement is safety related, the data can be confounded — e…

Yes disengagements can be noise, but there are significant differences between manufacturers, and Tesla's numbers were not competitive, and then they stopped reporting them, leaving us to draw our own conclusions. It is not a perfect metric, but it is a metric. You never did tell me what metric you are using to judge Tesla's progress. Since you clearly believe they are making progress, maybe you could tell me the reason why you think that.

Re: xAI

#266

Post by jauntywundrkind »

numbers_guy wrote: post #140
stillsut wrote: post #128

> The goal of xAI is to understand the true nature of the universe. People are misinterpreting this as the research goal. No, it's an implicit negation of an ethos - AI Ethics, Trust & Safety, ESG, Politically Correct - that have dominated decision making in product and hiring in tech for the past decade. Whether or not you agree with him, it's hard to deny that Musk is the only one offering researchers an escape fro…

There is literally nothing wrong with ethics in AI, or any other field of science. What is wrong is this woke supremacist nonsense, that some imbecile in Silicon Valley can dictate the truth about the world according to the woke bible, that's where the problem lies. Americans have gotten really intolerant of other cultures and ways of life. There's 8 billion people on this planet, ffs. We don't need the heavy handed…

I've tried a number of times to reply but keep getting flagged. The language here is extremist & pointed & polarizing.

This is a private company. They aren't required to hallucinate things that would harm their reputation to produce. That seems fine, & required if they are to survive.

Please stop flagging replies so actively! The intolerance here is saddening.

Re: xAI

#267

Post by [deleted] »

jeremyjh wrote: post #265
simondotau wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A count of all-cause disengagements is not "safety data", nor is it "objective public reporting". Much like LoC it can be a signal of progress early on but these days it's ambiguous noise given that many disengagements occur because of reasons other than safety, such as spotting a good place to park moments before reaching a destination. But even where a disengagement is safety related, the data can be confounded — e…

Yes disengagements can be noise, but there are significant differences between manufacturers, and Tesla's numbers were not competitive, and then they stopped reporting them, leaving us to draw our own conclusions. It is not a perfect metric, but it is a metric. You never did tell me what metric you are using to judge Tesla's progress. Since you clearly believe they are making progress, maybe you could tell me the rea…

[deleted]

Re: xAI

#268

Post by smoldesu »

numbers_guy wrote: post #212
dudeinhawaii wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stop using woke as shorthand because honestly I don't know what it's shorthand for. What other cultures and ways of life are Americans intolerant of? This seems to be at odds with the previous woke statement. This is why you need to use actual words that contain detail and specifics. This entire statement is market speak for twitter gen, a sound-bite to engender emotion that says nothing at all. It is itself a sympto…

Point is, OpenAI prioritizes catering to this twitter American political subculture over the rest of the whole wide world. And that is just wrong, especially when they are censoring perfectly valid published peer reviewed research.

If the majority of online text is written through the lens of political American subculture, then it stands to reason that models trained on it would reflect those values.

Re: xAI

#269

Post by simondotau »

adoxyz wrote: post #261
simondotau wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, you can guess at motives behind two among countless thousands of business decisions. Or you can observe progress of the FSD Beta software released to customers.

I've had access to FSD Beta since like the very first version. It hasn't made any significant progress to be honest. It still does the dumbest most unsafe things at the absolute worst time. In super ideal conditions it may be ok, but for the most part, I don't even try to use it anymore.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but your assertion is wildly divergent from the experience of many dozens of people who have documented their experiences in full on YouTube. It would be interesting to hear why you think your opinion is correct and theirs isn't. I'd be genuinely appreciative of any thoughts you have.

Re: xAI

#270

Post by PeterStuer »

bo1024 wrote: post #210
PeterStuer wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure dude. To be explicit. I'm not claiming what I felt/experienced was 'the thruth' or even 'real'. Just think it was for me the most 'clear' vision in my life, and that I feel a mild sadness it was so fleeting.

Didn't mean to be negative toward you, it just reminded me strongly of that passage. Later (in a sequel?) the girl is introduced and she refers to the memory of that moment in a similar way.

My appology. I shouldn't have read ill intent in your quote.
Post reply on HN