41–50 of 256 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Capitalism is made possible by the people. If it does not serve them well, it should be fixed or abolished.
“The AI capital influx means that mega-projects no longer seem outlandishly expensive. This is good for the world!” Is it? This whole piece just reads of mega funds and giga corps throwing ridiculous cash for pay to win. Nothing new there. We can’t train more people? I didn’t know Universities were suddenly producing waaaay less talent and that intelligence fell off a cliff. Things have gone parabolic! It’s giga mega…
The icing on the cake is when all their competitors say "so will we".
> AI catch-up investment has gone parabolic, initially towards GPUs and mega training runs. As some labs learned that GPUs alone don't guarantee good models, the capital cannon is shifting towards talent. So, no more bitter lesson?
“The AI capital influx means that mega-projects no longer seem outlandishly expensive. This is good for the world!” Is it? This whole piece just reads of mega funds and giga corps throwing ridiculous cash for pay to win. Nothing new there. We can’t train more people? I didn’t know Universities were suddenly producing waaaay less talent and that intelligence fell off a cliff. Things have gone parabolic! It’s giga mega…
[flagged]
The signing bonuses are probably more than enough for regular people to retire, but these researchers and execs being poached aren’t exactly average Joe’s making $50k/year prior to being poached.
The full bodied palate of this AI market mirrors the sharp nose of 2023 AI doomerism. The argument goes: if AI is going to destroy humanity, even if that is a 0.001% chance, we should all totally re-wire society to prevent that from happening, because the _potential_ risk is so huge. Same goes with these AI companies. What they are shooting for, is to replace white collar workers completely. Every single white collar…
He's quite active on Twitter.
> If the top 1% of companies drive the majority of VC returns, why shouldn’t the same apply to talent? Our natural egalitarian bias makes this unpalatable to accept, but the 10x engineer meme doesn’t go far enough – there are clearly people that are 1,000x the baseline impact. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0obMRztklqU
“The AI capital influx means that mega-projects no longer seem outlandishly expensive. This is good for the world!” Is it? This whole piece just reads of mega funds and giga corps throwing ridiculous cash for pay to win. Nothing new there. We can’t train more people? I didn’t know Universities were suddenly producing waaaay less talent and that intelligence fell off a cliff. Things have gone parabolic! It’s giga mega…
There is something immoral about a company saying "we are going to spend $100bn this year on building a LLM" The icing on the cake is when all their competitors say "so will we".
“The AI capital influx means that mega-projects no longer seem outlandishly expensive. This is good for the world!” Is it? This whole piece just reads of mega funds and giga corps throwing ridiculous cash for pay to win. Nothing new there. We can’t train more people? I didn’t know Universities were suddenly producing waaaay less talent and that intelligence fell off a cliff. Things have gone parabolic! It’s giga mega…
[flagged]
I find the current VC/billionaire strategy a bit odd and suboptimal. If we consider the current search for AGI as something like a multi-armed bandit seeking to identify “valuable researchers”, the industry is way over-indexing on the exploitation side of the exploitation/exploration trade-off. If I had billions to throw around, instead of siphoning large amounts of it to a relatively small number of people, I would…
it would be like if you were looking to train the next tennis star that had the ability to basically upend the entire game as we know it. maybe you saw a few people with a unique way of playing that were dominating an order of magnitude higher. you DEF would see teams and coaches having open tryouts and trying very unconventional things for anyone they could find that had promise.
for the record i think "AI" is not hype and is changing the way things are done permanently, but it's yet to be seem whether all these spent billions can actually meet the expected return (AGI). it's hard to separate out the true innovations from the obvious grift/money grab also going on.