351–360 of 573 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Technically, killing everybody is one way of solving famine and poverty. How weird that all those humans seem not to trust the logic of their betters ;P
you're right. it coincidentally solves cancer and infectious diseases as well. the ultimate utopia
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not the OP. > Do you not think that Amodei, who worked on research about cancer biomarkers at Stanford, knows a thing or two about how to apply AI to the problem? It certainly shows he is ambitious. > Is it that you don't trust a single word he says and that he lies for financial gain? Yes. > Or do you think he is wrong and that applying AI to this kind of research cannot possibly produce a breakthrough and lead to a…
And is there any evidence that suggests such flawed character? I am not familiar with Amodei's personal history, but I generally do not assume the worst of people just because they are extremely successful, like many others here seem to do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately it is not just the engineers that get laid off. Try finding a job as a translator, a copy writer or some other entry or mid level service economy kind of job.
It’s unfortunate no matter who!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you ever dealt with a government or government adjacent company? It'll be spec'd out so that it's cheaper to bend over and take it than take it to court and prove them wrong.
What's an example of a government adjacent company? And was that in a civil law country?
Toll road contractors, military base housing, municipal utility providers, private prisons, auto towing/impound, private rail transit operators, utilities, etc.
Basically every company the government grants a captive market to abuses everyone in that captive market as much as they can get away with.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apathetic mass-murder is unjustifiable, and the ultrarich would need to justify it to their families, who would then need to justify it to other people they know, and so on. And remember that we're talking about the majority of the global population, an event like that couldn't be hand-waved away like one would do for a minority group.
I consider DOGE actions to be pretty much exactly what you describe, with their sudden destruction of USAID and defunding of climate science
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does matter, because that's the entire point of the language. You know, memory safety? The vibe coded rust port did not get them any closer to full compiler verified memory safety. They still need to go file by file, bit by bit, and make it memory safe, at which point, why not just do that from zig.
> at which point, why not just do that from zig. because for the same effort you get a better result if you can and do use a better tool?
But I don't think they did it in a way that actually provided a meaningful gain. My point is that the state of the codebase right after the code is just a worse version of the original zig code with few of the rust advantages. Going from that Frankenstein rust code to actual memory safe rust is a similar leap to going from zig.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> where's the big deliverable from AI ... AI is simply "very useful" rather than being a historical game changer for humanity. The last 30 years of tech has been about big, the dot com boom, the next unicorn, the magnificent 7 or 11 or whatever. The thing is that the missing solutions people want have never been the one sized fits all multi Tennant we need 6 rounds of seed funding kinds of problems. The "app boom" sh…
So then shouldn't someone be able to see these huge mountains of grains of sand?
Hey, I just found 3 niche businesses that I can run because of AI and clear a million a year after costs.
Fight club rules apply, you dont talk about your advantages.
You get lawyers talking about their AI use (sometimes) because they are protected by the requirements of the bar. You people in niche businesses, or where it's about personal productivity, talking about it cause you cant replicate what they have done. You get folks in the sciences talking about how they are using LLM's to generate the python & scripts that make their world function with easy (rather than be a bottomless pit of time). These are people who might talk about their AI gains, but often have better things to do and don't run in programing / tech circles.
Unless you seek these people out you're not going to find their gains. It would be pretty hard for someone like anthropic to even begin to quantify time savings from generated code by "non programers" - because they don't have the data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And is there any evidence that suggests such flawed character? I am not familiar with Amodei's personal history, but I generally do not assume the worst of people just because they are extremely successful, like many others here seem to do.
I would say without a doubt yes. I've been following all of these characters basically from the time their companies and their names hit the press the first time (professionally) and without exception the 'tech bros' tend to be complete jerks, often on multiple axis. To the point that I'm wondering if success breeds this kind of person or if a particular kind of person is predestined to be successful in this kind of…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Problem with that is that it's not proper rust code, it's some kind of franken zig style rust port. The actual hard part is getting it into idiomatic, safe rust, and I don't believe the LLM port makes the full transition any easier than doing things the old fashioned way: a dual lang code base like Linux.
> I don't believe the LLM port makes the full transition any easier than doing things the old fashioned way: a dual lang code base like Linux ... how so? let's say Linus opens a branch, rust-temp, and in 2 weeks pushes ~15 million lines of code deleting most of the old C code. and then it gets merged in a few weeks. and then there's still a few months of the "merge window" and RC process. and each day folks report bu…
Long term stability is the thing that matters, such a move would be immensely threatening to long term stability.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would say without a doubt yes. I've been following all of these characters basically from the time their companies and their names hit the press the first time (professionally) and without exception the 'tech bros' tend to be complete jerks, often on multiple axis. To the point that I'm wondering if success breeds this kind of person or if a particular kind of person is predestined to be successful in this kind of…
If you're so familiar with Amodei's history, why don't you share what concretely you object to?
Between Musk, Altman, Schmidt, Amodei, Gates and a bunch of others I have a really hard time figuring out who is the least ethical. Probably Musk. But it may well be that the long term damage done by Amodei and Altman is larger. Ask me again in 10 years, if I'm still around.