601–610 of 713 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
LOL. The average Instagram user for sure doesn't know the company behind it. Also, "mathisfun", you might not be the typical person on this planet. Quick test, who makes Mars, Twix, Snickers?
Oh, you mean the guys that make Whiskas?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
TIL openai owns chat.com I hung out with my parents this weekend and heard them talking about "chat", as a noun. I assumed they were talking about ChatGPT; there being a literal chat.com makes sense why they'd call it that.
I’ve heard this recently too. It’s confusing because of the streamer convention of referring to their actively chatting audience as “chat,” which had also entered broader slang use. I saw one online use that seemed ambiguous, but I realized it referred to ChatGPT and that the poster was the exact type of guy who would be totally unaware of streamer culture despite being my age.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Former meta prick, sorry employee: > Meta's strategy Meta has no strategy. The people that made llama work left two years ago. MSI are a bunch of charlatans who are trying to change the culutre and tooling of meta from the outside (I can see their point, trying to work outside of the defaults is incredibly hard.) its basically a bun fight, with all of your productive workers being poached by frontier labs, and everyo…
Meta certainly do give the impression that they are burning through ridiculous amounts of cash with not much to show for it, and thats just from the outside.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Former meta prick, sorry employee: > Meta's strategy Meta has no strategy. The people that made llama work left two years ago. MSI are a bunch of charlatans who are trying to change the culutre and tooling of meta from the outside (I can see their point, trying to work outside of the defaults is incredibly hard.) its basically a bun fight, with all of your productive workers being poached by frontier labs, and everyo…
Meta certainly do give the impression that they are burning through ridiculous amounts of cash with not much to show for it, and thats just from the outside.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you're right, but I'd add that... if this wasn't obvious to you without being told, you should really question your worldview a bit. A lot of people think that chat.com is an AI called "chat". Most people don't know acronym "LLM". Most people don't know about the existence of companies called "OpenAI" or "Anthropic", or that they are worth a lot of money. Etc.
The joke of it is that I see those same people (ones who haven’t heard “LLM” before, don’t know what a model is or even the vaguest idea how these work, etc) have very strong opinions on the state of AI, where it’s headed, and are willing to make projections with timelines. Bill Maher is one example.
And its not really hard to at least understand one point: We are putting the most amount of money ever into compute and the smartest people on the planet on one topic: AGI and we see progress every month.
If you don't take this serious, even if we hit a hard plateu very fast (not seeing one at all) you are ignorant as hell.
You don't go to bed without a worry in the world if you have a wildfire 20km away you can see. You would also not see it as a waste to be awake and aware and alert while seeing were it moves.
The timeline thing though, its ranges right? But if you hear about the same or similiar timelines across different independent people, they just might have seen things in frontierlabs you can't.
Btw. AI feels complelty different if you have a lot more tokens available to you than if you wait or constantly run into token limits or if you skip fable level because you can't /wont afford it.
Imagine sitting in Anthropic or OpenAI and having the best moodel doing all the work for you vs. sometimes playing with it a little bit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They only need to get caught doing it once to have a gigantic lawsuit on their hands. They could possibly pull it off very selectively, but doing it in a dragnet fashion seems incredibly risky.
What grounds would the lawsuit be based on? I can’t imagine that slurping any kind of data would be inconsistent with their EULA. The only risk would be the reputational damage. And as far as their bottom line is concerned, the impact of that would be negligible—how many of WhatsApp’s billion(?) users know that it’s supposed to be E2EE, let alone are under the illusion that Meta doesn’t have access to their data?
Beyond that, the GDPR and similar laws also impose limits as to what you can EULA away even without being deceptive about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They only need to get caught doing it once to have a gigantic lawsuit on their hands. They could possibly pull it off very selectively, but doing it in a dragnet fashion seems incredibly risky.
My suspicion is that things like URL previews, or when the app calls a handler to open a link (YouTube, browser), are still monitored. So e.g. opening a link to an Amazon product that a friend sent makes you a target for ads in that category. It's a suspicion, they'd probably argue their EULA allows this. The typical "we have to monitor links for dangerous content" is always the standard bullshit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The joke of it is that I see those same people (ones who haven’t heard “LLM” before, don’t know what a model is or even the vaguest idea how these work, etc) have very strong opinions on the state of AI, where it’s headed, and are willing to make projections with timelines. Bill Maher is one example.
Its fine if he trusts the right experts. And its not really hard to at least understand one point: We are putting the most amount of money ever into compute and the smartest people on the planet on one topic: AGI and we see progress every month. If you don't take this serious, even if we hit a hard plateu very fast (not seeing one at all) you are ignorant as hell. You don't go to bed without a worry in the world if y…