Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point is it won’t be if these new models stay locked to the public.
You can’t use your own brain?
The point is you won’t be able to compete with just your brain
The Closing of the Frontier
101–110 of 142 posts
Re: The Closing of the Frontier
#102Re: The Closing of the Frontier
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can do things without AI. That hasn’t really changed.
The point is you won’t be able to compete with just your brain
I think that remains to be proven. The context was 16-year olds being able to freely build things. They still can do that as before. Not everything is a competition.
Re: The Closing of the Frontier
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
We saw yesterday that expert orchestration around small, publicly available models can produce results on the level of the unreleased model. I take a contra view and instead see this as fuel on the fire for tinkering to squeeze advanced functionality out of more available things. It has always been like this, the amateur improvising tooling and equipment to outdo companies with comparably infinite resources.
>> We saw yesterday that expert orchestration around small, publicly available models can produce results on the level of the unreleased model. This is false. Yesterday's article did not actually show this, and there are many comments in the discussion from actual security people (like tptacek) pointing that out.
From what I can tell, this was not clearly settled.
Your example author, actually corrected themselves saying LLMs “possibly” could perform successfully: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47732696
Re: The Closing of the Frontier
#105This feels really premature. The announcement was a week ago. The “this model is too powerful for the general public” sounds like marketing to me. Give it a few months and it will be just another model they are selling, but the NEWER model is just too powerful for the public.
Yup, this whole thing is quite typical for my generations attempts at activism: they always end up as marketing pawns for the very thing they set out to stop. This whole "this model is too dangerous" ploy originated from (in my opinion severely misguided) activists who wanted to stop or slow AI development down as much as possible, spreading outlandish Doomsday scenarios wherever they could. These online-first activi…
> online-first activists have always been a key driver of the success
Eh, pressing X to doubt that. Maybe way back in the early GPT days, but once we got to GPT-4 these people could have completely disappeared and wouldn't have changed the trajectory we're on.
Re: The Closing of the Frontier
#106I admit I didn't read the entire post (I honestly think authors really need to come to terms with the fact that we now live in a world of information excess, and pithiness is more important than ever), but I wouldn't feel too bad yet given there was a recent front page HN post about how free, open models could actually catch all the issues Mythos did, it just required a little more orchestration. E.g. see https://ais…
> pithiness is more important than ever I apologize for getting stuck on your parenthetical but while pithiness is a fine aspiration in a North American business setting, pithy reads generally can't exist without more detailed and nuanced long-form analyses, and the latter face a more dire existential threat. You are right that pithy [writing] is an important skill, as are slow and deliberative reading and writing of…
To give a clearer example of what I was talking about, look at the linked article from my comment above. It is much longer than the original article from this post, but it (a) starts with a TL;DR, so it gives me a summary that lets me know if I want to read it in the first place, (b) combines detailed original research with analysis and opinion, and, IMO (c) continually adds new information/insights so it builds on itself.
Obviously not apples-to-apples comparison to this article as they have different purposes (original research vs. pure opinion), I just point this out because a bunch of comments seem to be stuck on the idea that I was saying "don't write anything that doesn't fit in a tweet", and that wasn't my point at all.
Re: The Closing of the Frontier
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let’s say the model is indeed groundbreaking but needs much more compute that they have, I wonder would merging Anthropic and OpenAI be on the table.
On the efficiency side, why do we need 10 companies doing the same thing. "Don't Repeat Yourself" principle would agree with your proposal.
Hello. We have detected your account has breached our terms of service. Your account has been banned. There is no recourse for this actions.
As we all well know this message is great when there one or two private providers that can kick you from an entire market with no way of challenging them.
Re: The Closing of the Frontier
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let’s say the model is indeed groundbreaking but needs much more compute that they have, I wonder would merging Anthropic and OpenAI be on the table.
It depends. If Mythos is AGI then OpenAI's charter says they have to merge with the winner.
And I have a bridge to sell you...
There is obviously tons of leeway it who gets to say what is "AGI", and so far it seems like OpenAI's charter isn't worth the paper it's printed on. I still find it funny that Altman and Amodei couldn't even bring themselves to hold hands at that AI summit, https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1r8ua2j/sam_altma... , so I'm getting a chuckle at the thought that Altman would be like "Whelp, close er up, boys, Amodei won, so time to merge..."
Re: The Closing of the Frontier
#109This feels really premature. The announcement was a week ago. The “this model is too powerful for the general public” sounds like marketing to me. Give it a few months and it will be just another model they are selling, but the NEWER model is just too powerful for the public.
There’s a drain clog clearer sold in a jug like all the rest. But they wrap the jug in a thick clear bag. The implication is clear - this stuff is so powerful it’s extra dangerous. It’s the same stuff inside as all the others.
No. That stuff is sulfuric acid and it needs secondary containment during shipping, which the ordinary drain cleaners (usually diluted sodium hydroxide) generally do not.
Re: The Closing of the Frontier
#110> A 16-year-old with no credentials and no capital could just do things. The world of bits offered the freedom to build without being drowned in arbitrary constraints, in a way that didn’t require assembling vast capital or prestige or connections, where your creativity and work could speak for itself, and you had agency. This is now truer than it ever was.
The point is it won’t be if these new models stay locked to the public.
That assumes “more model” is the part that differentiates successful ideas from unsuccessful ones.
Governments and corporations controlled enormous mainframes far beyond the compute available to the hacker kid we were waxing nostalgic about, didn’t they? Not to mention the PhDs, the mountains of capital, and so on?
My money’s on team human.