Is this a troll
The Flat Curve Society
11–20 of 31 posts
Re: The Flat Curve Society
#12If the most expensive models yet to come will end up behind bars by default, what is the economic incentive to make them in the first place?
Re: The Flat Curve Society
#13GPT-2 was already extremely dangerous.
So was the computational capabilities of Playstation 2. It could be used to simulate nuclear weapons, I heard.
Re: The Flat Curve Society
#14I miss the old Steve Yegge that actually knew how to write coherently. AI psychosis is apparently a hell of a drug... this is pages and pages of complete dreck.
Re: The Flat Curve Society
#15I find it very interesting to read blogs like this which describe and predict the societal impact of AI. However, this impact is all framed in terms of developers. In the end this is a niche (albeit an important one) use of AI. I don’t believe for a moment that software development will be the primary use of LLMs that changes society, at least not in the long term.
Re: The Flat Curve Society
#16I miss the old Steve Yegge that actually knew how to write coherently. AI psychosis is apparently a hell of a drug... this is pages and pages of complete dreck.
Same. Used to publish some good stuff 10+ years ago.
Re: The Flat Curve Society
#17Nuclear weapons… somewhat complicated to build and complicated to maintain, mass-produce, transport, smuggle, hide, and use.
Models on the other hand are just software. You can download Fable / Mythos / Praxia / Concordicon and hide a copy in your shoe. You can make two copies even! One per shoe!
We have lived through decades now of the glorious open source revolution so it’s easy to forget about a different time, in the 1990s, when a black market in CDs jammed full of cracked, slightly off branded copies of Windows / Photoshop / Corel / Office, etc. was all the rage.
Execution isn’t trivial. If anything should be controlled like nuclear weapons, again like the 90s, it ought to be compute hardware. I’m not sure it should.
Re: The Flat Curve Society
#18Far too dismissive of oss models. This sounds like MS employees talking about linux circa 2002. This attitude would have written off linux in the early 00s as doomed for not "keeping up" with windows. The oss option will always appear behind the curve but they inevitably catch up... if they even need too. AI is no different. The free/oss option will be niche and disregarded by the bigs but it will survive and thrive,…
I think that the open source systems being behind is sort of the point, they are the baseline. A paid proprietary system must be better than this. An example.
If you want me to pay for your compiler it must be that much better than the compiler I can get for free that allows me much more freedom of agency in how I use it, if it is not I am going to use the free compiler. repeat for operating systems, word processors, databases and now LLM's
Re: The Flat Curve Society
#19I found a lot of interesting, if speculative, thoughts in the article, but... > Superhuman means unverifiable is not true for at least large classes of problems. The recent solution of the "unit distance" problem comes to mind, or any future AI-solved math problem that was beyond the capabilities of humans. You can tell it's superhuman (it's doing things humans can't) and you can easily verify its results are correct…
NP problems can be verified in P time.
Re: The Flat Curve Society
#20I miss the old Steve Yegge that actually knew how to write coherently. AI psychosis is apparently a hell of a drug... this is pages and pages of complete dreck.
Why is it dreck? Other than being predictions so probably wrong in that sense?
I do disagree with parts of it, but dreck?