231–240 of 489 posts
This is where we're headed: https://sibylline.dev/articles/2025-10-12-ai-is-too-big-to-f...
Well we could still vote out the corrupt and actually invest in US infrastructure but I guess that's crazier than hanging all our hopes on AI serfdom.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Taking the example of egyptian archeology, if you're reading the work of someone who is well regarded as an expert in the field, you can trust their word a lot more than you can trust the word of an AI, even if the AI is provided the text you're reading. This is a pretty massive difference between the two, and your narrative is part of why AI is proving to be so harmful for education in general. Delusional dreamers a…
The vast majority of people trying to do any given thing simply don’t have access to experts in the field, though. I’ll take a potential solution I can validate over no idea whatsoever of my own any day.
This is where we're headed: https://sibylline.dev/articles/2025-10-12-ai-is-too-big-to-f...
Cell phones have been through how many generations between the 80s and now? All the past generations are obsolete, but the investment in improving the technology (which is really a continuation of WWII era RF engineering) means we have readily available low cost miniature comms equipment. It doesn’t matter that the capex on individual phones was wasted. Same for GPUs/LLMs? At some point things will mature and we’ll b…
> At some point things will mature and we’ll be left with plentiful, cheap, high end LLM access, on the back of the investment that has been made. Okay, and? What if the demand for LLMs plummets because people get disillusioned due to the failure to solve issues like hallucinations? If nobody is willing to buy, who cares how cheap it gets?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but we could still be in for 50 years of suffering. I mean if you are talking about USA itself falling into dystopic metastability in such a situation, maybe, but even so I think it misses some nuance. I don't see every other country following USA into oblivion, and also I don't see the USA bending the knee to techno-kings and in the process giving up real influence for some bet on total influence. The only mechani…
That's basically my maximum likelihood scenario.
My maximum is that the courts restrain Trump enough that we still have at least the shell of a democracy after he's gone. But he blazed the trail, and in 20 or 30 years someone will walk it better, having done a better job of neutralizing or politicizing or perhaps deligitimizing the courts first. Then it's game over.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Taking the example of egyptian archeology, if you're reading the work of someone who is well regarded as an expert in the field, you can trust their word a lot more than you can trust the word of an AI, even if the AI is provided the text you're reading. This is a pretty massive difference between the two, and your narrative is part of why AI is proving to be so harmful for education in general. Delusional dreamers a…
The vast majority of people trying to do any given thing simply don’t have access to experts in the field, though. I’ll take a potential solution I can validate over no idea whatsoever of my own any day.
If any answer is acceptable, just get your local toddler to babble some nonsense for you.
I cant believe people still arent grasping the profound implications of computers that can talk and make decisions.
Reminds me of crypto/Web-3.0 hype. Lots of bluster about changing economic systems, offering people freedom and wealth, only to mostly be scams, and coming with too serious inherent drawbacks/costs to solve many of the big problems it promises to solve. In the end leaving the world changed, but not as meaningfully or positively as promised.
She doesn't like using Claude, but she accepts the necessity of doing so, and it reduces 3-month projects to 2-week projects. Claude is an excellent debating partner.
Crypto? Blockchain? No-one sceptical could ever see the point of either, unless and until their transaction costs were less than that of cash. That... has not happened, to put it mildly.
These things are NOT the same.
This is where we're headed: https://sibylline.dev/articles/2025-10-12-ai-is-too-big-to-f...
Very US-centric article. Written by insecure people who are clinging to power and money desperately. I don't see how some kind of big breakthrough is going to happen with the current model designs. The superintelligence, if it will ever be created, will require a new breakthrough in model architecture. We've pretty much hit the limit of what is possible with current LLMs. The improvements are marginal at this point.…
He writes as if only datacenters and network equipment remain after the AI bubble bursts. Like there won't be any AI models anymore, nothing left after the big training runs and trillion-dollar R&D, and no inference served.
Who's going to pay to run those models? They are currently running at a huge loss.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're not running at a loss. Training runs at a loss, but the models are profitable to serve if you don't need to continuously train new models.
But you do or you're missing current events, right?
The main reason they train new models is to make them bigger and better using the latest training techniques, not to update them with the latest knowledge.