Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Build fabs Such a misguided take. If it were that easy to build fabs to compete with TSMC, Intel would do it. China would do it. Hardware is way harder than software.
Or maybe, just maybe, TSMC has gaslit all of us to think it is much harder than it really is. If Taiwan isn't needed for its chips, what is the strategic interest of the USG?
TSMC execs allegedly dismissed OpenAI CEO Sam Altman as 'podcasting bro'
191–200 of 581 posts
Re: TSMC execs allegedly dismissed OpenAI CEO Sam Altman as 'podcasting bro'
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
There will be a whole industry of people who fix what AI has created. I don't know if it will be faster to build the wrong thing and pay to have it fixed or to build the right thing from the get go, but after having seen some shit, like you, I have a little idea.
Correction: a whole industry of AI that will fix what AI has created.
Re: TSMC execs allegedly dismissed OpenAI CEO Sam Altman as 'podcasting bro'
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s a lot of money to be made if you can reliable distinguish the two in advance.
I don't think there is appetite for this, in big tech especially. People are looking for glamorous next big things, everyone wants to be the first in some green field thing instead of digging into "the boring stuff we've been hearing about since forever". Imagine, even Apple completely enshittified their OSes just so they're on the bandwagon of AI with zero added value.
Population size is about to peak. Up until now, for as long as we know, it has been growing. Starting at the latest with colonisation, we've had more people, more resources, new markets advancing into buyers of new products. Once societies advance to a certain point, they begin to shrink, this is well studied.
Without these growth factors, does it seem likely we'll see something as transformative as the automobile or the internet again?
Possibly bleak and badly informed, but I find it plausible to think that the party is about to end. Most of us here have probably seen what happens to a company when they stop growing. Spoiler: It's typically not innovation.
Re: TSMC execs allegedly dismissed OpenAI CEO Sam Altman as 'podcasting bro'
#194Re: TSMC execs allegedly dismissed OpenAI CEO Sam Altman as 'podcasting bro'
#195I was having some kind of issue the other day - browser cache corruption issue or ChatGPT hiccuped for a few minutes - but I needed to know an answer for a thing RIGHT NOW. I reluctantly went back to Google and searched for it the old way. Just ... OMFG ... I used to do this all the time? This used to be how you learned things? You mean I get to read 10 sites and 25 dumb answers to get to a possibly correct one? And…
Re: TSMC execs allegedly dismissed OpenAI CEO Sam Altman as 'podcasting bro'
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reminds me of autonomous vehicles a couple of years back. Or even AI a couple of years back, remember Watson? The hype cycle was faster to close that time.
IBM Watson was more than a couple years back. The Jeopardy event was in 2011. It's currently 2024. As for cars, I don't know what you're referring to specifically, and the hype is still ongoing as far as I can tell. It has taken 10+ years to get to present day, from the start of the "deep learning revolution" around 2010. I vaguely recall Uber promising self-driving pickups somewhere around 8-10 years ago. A main dif…
But they aren't particularly autonomous, there's a fleet of humans watching the Waymos carefully and frequently intervening for the case where every 10-20 miles or so the system makes a stupid decision that needs human intervention: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/09/03/technology/zo...
I think Waymo only releases the "critical" intervention rate, which is quite low. But for Cruise the non-critical interventions was every 5 miles and I suspect Waymos are similar. It appears that Waymos are way too easily confused and left to their own devices make awful decisions about passing emergency vehicles, etc.
Which is in fact consistent with what self-driving skeptics were saying all the way back in 2010: deep learning could get you 95% of the way there but it will take many decades - probably centuries! - before we actually have real self-driving cars. The remote human operators will work for robotaxis and buses but not for Teslas.
(Not to mention the problems that will start when robotaxis get old and in need of automotive maintenance, but the system didn't have any transmission problem scenarios in its training data. At no time in my life has my human intelligence been more taxed than when I had a tire blowout on the interstate while driving an overloaded truck.)
Re: TSMC execs allegedly dismissed OpenAI CEO Sam Altman as 'podcasting bro'
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
There will be a whole industry of people who fix what AI has created. I don't know if it will be faster to build the wrong thing and pay to have it fixed or to build the right thing from the get go, but after having seen some shit, like you, I have a little idea.
Correction: a whole industry of AI that will fix what AI has created.
Re: TSMC execs allegedly dismissed OpenAI CEO Sam Altman as 'podcasting bro'
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
Using Claude 3.5 Sonnet in Cursor Composer already shows huge benefits for coding. I'm more productive than ever before. The models are still getting better and better. I'm not saying AGI is right around the corner or that we will reach it, but the benefits are undeniable. o1 added test-time compute. No need to be snarky.
There's no accounting for taste, but keep in mind that all of these services are currently losing money, so how much would you actually be willing to pay for the service you're currently getting in order to let it break even? There was a report that Microsoft is losing $20 for every $10 spent on Copilot subscriptions, with heavy users costing them as much as $80 per month. Assuming you're one of those heavy users, wo…
- ok it works, but it won't be useful.
- ok it's useful, but it won't scale.
- ok it scales, but it won't make any money.
- ok it makes money, but it's not going to last.
etc etc
Re: TSMC execs allegedly dismissed OpenAI CEO Sam Altman as 'podcasting bro'
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's interesting, but technology has always been about augmenting or mimicking human intelligence, though. The Turing test is literally about computers being able to mimic humans so well that real humans wouldn't be able to tell them apart. We're now past that point in some areas, but we never really prioritized thinking about what intelligence _actually_ is, and how we can best reproduce it. At the end of the day,…
> If humans can be fooled by artificial intelligence in pretty much all areas, This is just preposterous. You can be fooled if you have no knowledge in the area but that's about it. With current tech there is, there can not be anything novel. Guernica was novel. No matter how you train any probabilistic model on every piece of art produced before Guernica it'll never ever create it. There are novel novels (sorry for…
I wasn't talking about current tech, which is obviously not at human levels of intelligence yet. I would still say that our progress in the last 100 years, and the last 50 in particular, has been astonishing. What's preposterous is expecting that we can crack a problem we've been thinking about for millennia in just 100 years.
Do you honestly think that once we're able to build AI that _fully_ mimics humans by every measurement we have, that we'll care whether or not it's biological? That was my question, and "no" was my answer. Whether we can do this without understanding how biological intelligence works is another matter.
Also, AI doesn't even need to fully mimic our intelligence to be useful, as we've seen with the current tech. Dismissing it because of this is throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Re: TSMC execs allegedly dismissed OpenAI CEO Sam Altman as 'podcasting bro'
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
Arguing over terminology like "AGI" and the verb "to know" is a waste of time. The question is what tools can be built from them and how can people use those tools.
I'm directly responding to a comment discussing the popular perception that we, as a society, are "steps away" from AGI. It sounds like you agree that we aren't anywhere close to AGI. If you want to discuss the potential for LLMs to disrupt the economy there's definitely space for that discussion but that isn't the comment I was making.