Live data from Hacker News

S1: A $6 R1 competitor?

timkellogg.me

21–30 of 430 posts

Re: S1: A $6 R1 competitor?

#21
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think using any of this in a national security setting is stupid What about AI enabled drones and guided missiles/rockets? The case for their effectiveness is relatively simple in terms of jamming resistance.

Like a lot of AI boosters, would you like to explain how that works other than magic AI dust? Some forms of optical guidance are already in use, but there's other limitations (lighting! weather!)

Sure thing. The basic idea would be:

1) Have a camera on your drone 2) Run some frames through a locally running version of something like AWS Rekognition's celebrity identification service but for relevant military targets. 3) Navigate towards coordinates of target individuals

It isn't exactly magic, here's a video of a guy doing navigation with openCV on images: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nrzs3dQ9exw

Re: S1: A $6 R1 competitor?

#22
> having 10,000 H100s just means that you can do 625 times more experiments than s1 did

I think the ball is very much in their court to demonstrate they actually are using their massive compute in such a productive fashion. My BigTech experience would tend to suggest that frugality went out the window the day the valuation took off, and they are in fact just burning compute for little gain, because why not...

Re: S1: A $6 R1 competitor?

#23
post #8

> If you believe that AI development is a prime national security advantage, then you absolutely should want even more money poured into AI development, to make it go even faster. This, this is the problem for me with people deep in AI. They think it’s the end all be all for everything. They have the vision of the ‘AI’ they’ve seen in movies in mind, see the current ‘AI’ being used and to them it’s basically almost t…

> I think using any of this in a national security setting is stupid What about AI enabled drones and guided missiles/rockets? The case for their effectiveness is relatively simple in terms of jamming resistance.

drone and missile guidance system development has been using ML for decades at this point. That's just as much "AI" as anything currently coming out of the LLM craze.

Re: S1: A $6 R1 competitor?

#24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think using any of this in a national security setting is stupid What about AI enabled drones and guided missiles/rockets? The case for their effectiveness is relatively simple in terms of jamming resistance.

I would say that they don't require an 500bln$ investment. AFAIK, drone that help lock on target have started being used in Ukraine

I generally agree, piggybacking on innovations in smartphone GPUs / batteries will probably be enough to get locally running AI models in drones.

Re: S1: A $6 R1 competitor?

#25
post #8

> If you believe that AI development is a prime national security advantage, then you absolutely should want even more money poured into AI development, to make it go even faster. This, this is the problem for me with people deep in AI. They think it’s the end all be all for everything. They have the vision of the ‘AI’ they’ve seen in movies in mind, see the current ‘AI’ being used and to them it’s basically almost t…

> This is machine learning

Yeah, I was thinking about this while trying to figure out author affiliations.

There was a Stanford paper a few years ago that dusted off some old intelligence concepts and the authors seemed excited about it.

But given the pace of AI, it's difficult to look in new directions. It will probably take an AI winter and some unbridled enthusiasm immune to burnout to make some real progress outside of feed forward neural networks.

Re: S1: A $6 R1 competitor?

#27
post #8

> If you believe that AI development is a prime national security advantage, then you absolutely should want even more money poured into AI development, to make it go even faster. This, this is the problem for me with people deep in AI. They think it’s the end all be all for everything. They have the vision of the ‘AI’ they’ve seen in movies in mind, see the current ‘AI’ being used and to them it’s basically almost t…

Also the narrative that we are currently on the brink of Ai explosion and this random paper shows it has been the same tired old story handed out by ai hawks for years now. Like yes, I agree with the general idea that more compute means more progress for humans and perhaps having a more responsive user interface through some kind of ai type technology would be good. But I don’t see why that will turn into Data from S…

I find the last part of the paragraph offputting and I agree

Re: S1: A $6 R1 competitor?

#28
post #8

> If you believe that AI development is a prime national security advantage, then you absolutely should want even more money poured into AI development, to make it go even faster. This, this is the problem for me with people deep in AI. They think it’s the end all be all for everything. They have the vision of the ‘AI’ they’ve seen in movies in mind, see the current ‘AI’ being used and to them it’s basically almost t…

> They think it’s the end all be all for everything.

Is (human-based) general intelligence not one of the fundamental enabling elements of literally every human activity throughout history, regardless of how many layers of automation and technology one has to peel back to get to it?

Can you maybe imagine how the ability to create arbitrary amounts of general intelligence, completely divorced from the normal lengthy biological process, could upend that foundation of human activity?

> They have the vision of the ‘AI’ they’ve seen in movies in mind, see the current ‘AI’ being used and to them it’s basically almost the same, their brain is mental bridging the concepts and saying it’s only a matter of time.

I've found that most AI-related movies exclusively focus on "quality ASI" scenarios, which are mostly irrelevant to our current state of the world, as an immense amount of danger/value/disruption will arrive with AGI. People who are seriously reasoning about the impacts of AGI are not using movies as references. "Those stupid movie watching idiots" is just a crutch you are using to avoid thinking about something that you disagree with.

> Real AI, artificial intelligence, is a fever dream. This is machine learning except the machines are bigger than ever before. There is no intellect.

Do you have any evidence to support this conclusion? And does it even matter? If "fake intellect" can replace a human, that human still has to deal with the very real issue or not having a job anymore. If "fake intellect" is used to conduct mass surveillance, and direct suppression activities towards divergent individuals, those individuals are still going to have a bad time.

Re: S1: A $6 R1 competitor?

#29
post #8

> If you believe that AI development is a prime national security advantage, then you absolutely should want even more money poured into AI development, to make it go even faster. This, this is the problem for me with people deep in AI. They think it’s the end all be all for everything. They have the vision of the ‘AI’ they’ve seen in movies in mind, see the current ‘AI’ being used and to them it’s basically almost t…

You would solve the ai problem if you correctly defined what intellect even is.

Re: S1: A $6 R1 competitor?

#30
post #8

> If you believe that AI development is a prime national security advantage, then you absolutely should want even more money poured into AI development, to make it go even faster. This, this is the problem for me with people deep in AI. They think it’s the end all be all for everything. They have the vision of the ‘AI’ they’ve seen in movies in mind, see the current ‘AI’ being used and to them it’s basically almost t…

Yes, I'd like to see some examples where our current AI can actually extrapolate rather than interpolate. Let it invent new things, new drawing styles, new story plots, etc. Maybe _then_ it will impress me.
Post reply on HN