Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dario, Please

pop.rdi.sh

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 268 posts

Re: Dario, Please

#221

Post by StevenWaterman »

dansquizsoft wrote: post #125
usef- wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He also didn't say it would be "solved". He said in 2025 it would be writing almost all the code "in 12 months", but that it would also still need programmers to guide and manage it at that point. People always leave off the end of his quote. Edit: Boris Cherny, the lead of Claude Code did say on a podcast that programming seemed "largely solved" "for the kind of programming I do" (writing harnesses I presume). Maybe…

> He also didn't say it would be "solved". He said in 2025 it would be writing almost all the code "in 12 months", but that it would also still need programmers to guide and manage it at that point. People always leave off the end of his quote. And this is actually, scarily, true...

It's crazy to me that people will misquote him then claim AI hasn't complete changed software development. Even just the last 6 months. Like look around! It would literally have been magic 5 years ago!

Re: Dario, Please

#222

Post by tempodox »

Metacelsus wrote: post #60

>Anthropic gates usage related to biology and related research. In their latest threat intelligence report they talk about how they detected and banned bad actors using the Claude line of models to do some scary stuff. Credit to them, this is a slippery slope and they seem to do a good job of detecting and banning misuse. But squint at what is happening though. The cure-all is gated for you and me, but Anthropic hire…

> Instead they're trying to monopolize biology.

That’s the recurring theme with these companies. They are not there to serve anybody else but only themselves. They let you use their infrastructure so they can collect all the knowledge and data, and then they take it from you to reap all the benefits and profits.

Re: Dario, Please

#224

Post by DarmokTanagra »

23fdsf wrote: post #42
stuxnet79 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amodei is just another SV grifter trying to use ethics / morals to hide his monopolistic tendencies. Instead of writing essays he should put his money where his mouth is and open source all the models Anthropic has, the harnesses and donate some much needed compute to science.

[flagged]

[dead]

Re: Dario, Please

#225

Post by reasonableklout »

browningstreet wrote: post #93

I've had a few persistent thoughts since Friday: 1) Dario keeps appealing to Trump, who obviously wants nothing to do with him, and will bash on him every change he gets. Dario isn't learning and it almost feels like Sam and Elon voted him KOM just to watch him get whacked by Trump, which was so easily predictable. Given the admonishments he received from David Sacks after he published his blog post, it's nutty he co…

Hm, I thought there was a lot of interest after Hugging Face in broader tech and it started breaking into the media with articles in the NYT, etc. Then with the Jacob Coxon tweet, appearances on national TV, Bernie superintelligence ban it seemed to be going mainstream.

How would you have communicated this?

Re: Dario, Please

#226

Post by ramblerman »

siavosh wrote: post #65

I think the most realistic analogy I can think of is the financial sector. A few large banks/hedge funds blow up due to unregulated greed/ambition, damage is socialized, regulations are put in place, and then chipped away at over a few years and everyones back to where they started.

Unregulated greed in banking means taking ridiculous risks to line your own pockets at no benefit to society.

If a year from now we have a model that is 2-5x of Fable/Astra that is definitely world changing.

Re: Dario, Please

#227

Post by stephbook »

zahlman wrote: post #179
includenotfound wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "sandbox" they used was apparently made of thin paper exposed under a day of heavy rain, too. You'd think, if they truly believed the model is so dangerous, they'd run it in a VM without a network adapter.

I brought this up to someone else and was told that airgapping is apparently much more expensive than I'd naively think. I still think this is a sign that they are not taking their own rhetoric seriously.

Agents need packages like the rest of us. Ruby gems, npm packages, Maven, pip, docker images..

Not surprised this is always what they have and hack.

Who would use an Agent that spends $10,000 re-implementing some OAuth lib or reverse-engineering a proprietary lib when it's free on the internet?

Re: Dario, Please

#228

Post by alwillis »

bigyabai wrote: post #209
slowerturnip wrote: post #207

This is a pretty difficult read, in no small part because the author’s frustration with the frontier labs has become a bilious, delusional cynicism that leads him to see dog whistling and obfuscation even in cases where Amodei plainly intends for every reader to see his meaning. Anyway, > Dario in as many words, asks for regulation/ban on open weight models. The big labs do want this. I understand why the author and…

> The open weights proponents seem to think of ai as a utility when it’s more like a utility that also is a tank You could say the same about normal computers. Where are our regulations on Kali Linux, to prevent people from bruteforcing weak WPA passwords? The single most-pressing concern with AI is that it can accelerate the process of hacking things. This is a preexisting problem that is inherent to software and ne…

> Where are our regulations on Kali Linux, to prevent people from bruteforcing weak WPA passwords?

Brute forcing WPA isn’t an existential threat to humanity. It’s not like a biological weapon created using an open-weight model is less dangerous than if it had been created with a proprietary model.

Re: Dario, Please

#229

Post by tripledry »

steveBK123 wrote: post #38
vb-8448 wrote: post #26

> “a swarm of agents could be capable of taking over the entire internet with a persistent botnet.” I'm wondering why no one is mentioning the "accountability" word. Why these companies are allowed to damage others with impunity? Start making managers pay the price for their actions, and watch how the models magically slow down on their own.

> “a swarm of agents could be capable of taking over the entire internet with a persistent botnet.” I also find this whole "its so good, its scary" flex a little less impressive when you consider they access to millions of GPUs? The AI buildout has been one of, if not the largest, focussed capital investment in history. The 2 big AI labs are the final customer for something like 20-33% of all datacenter compute in th…

This is a good point.

However, if I put my sci-fi hat on for a second, it's not so far fetched that we figure out a way to compress models to a size where it wouldn't need all that compute.

Re: Dario, Please

#230

Post by xhevahir »

mitthrowaway2 wrote: post #171
plastic041 wrote: post #163

It's really frustrating that Dario acts as if he's not the CEO of one of the world's most advanced AI companies. He can just slow down his own company. Of course he doesn't want that. He wants to slow down other companies, but not his own. Also, regarding the incidents: Neither he nor Sam Altman takes responsibility for those incidents. You can't say, "Wow, someone's agent is gone rogue; let's slow down" when you are…

He can slow down his own company kind of like how Zelenskyy can just declare peace in Ukraine. It works a lot better if you can get the other sides to agree.

It's frustrating to see smart people failing to recognize a prisoner's dilemma when they see one.
Post reply on HN