31–40 of 67 posts
I guess we are recycling company names now? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking_Machines_Corporation (I know, Corp vs. Lab).
So weird to re-use the name of something so iconic.
Why would you call your company Thinking Machines if you believe this, by calling them that you're already framing them as replacing the human act of thinking. Feels like they appropriated the name first, then pivoted ideologically to differentiate themselves from everyone else.
It doesn't have to imply replacement. Do you stop thinking just because other humans can?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're making a "few hundred million of ARR" - not bad for a company who only launched their first product, a training platform called Tinker in October last year. https://x.com/deedydas/status/2072340532718887068
Show me the receipts. Thats one guy on a podcast.
> Artificial intelligence can do more every day, but deciding what it should do is up to us > For artificial intelligence to benefit from distributed knowledge, it must itself be distributed. I wish to highlight these two important concepts, with which I fully agree. Artificial intelligence must enable all of humanity to excel and realize its full potential; it must not be used for the purposes of war, economic compe…
A massive amount of human natural intelligence goes into war, economic competition and gaining dominance over others though?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Inevitably yes, the question is whether the combined cyborg is still better than the original human. E.g. I'm sure we are generally less skilled in mental arithmetic since the advent of the calculator, but it has allowed us to solve vastly more complex problems in the end.
> E.g. I'm sure we are generally less skilled in mental arithmetic since the advent of the calculator, but it has allowed us to solve vastly more complex problems in the end. This is like saying we have been getting a lot worse at walking since the advent of the car but it has allowed us to practice global trade in the end. Yes cars are a part of the solution but there are a lot more factors at play. A calculator doe…
My experience is that AI is just that, a “mech suit for your brain.” It has no creativity or volition but has superhuman memory, superhuman speed, and superhuman context in some narrow cases. So it takes a thought and unfolds it, looks up relevant thoughts and information, elaborates, works through implications, and in some cases can execute. You could do all that but like doing math manually it would take forever. Y…
The comparison with manual calculation or other mechanical operations doesn’t work, LLMs don’t work at the same level of abstraction, they take over the decision making human generally do. When you write code or write a text, us humans are continuously taking lots of small decisions, we don’t just translate 1:1 a thought to an artifact. And that’s the part that is taken over by LLMs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> E.g. I'm sure we are generally less skilled in mental arithmetic since the advent of the calculator, but it has allowed us to solve vastly more complex problems in the end. This is like saying we have been getting a lot worse at walking since the advent of the car but it has allowed us to practice global trade in the end. Yes cars are a part of the solution but there are a lot more factors at play. A calculator doe…
By vastly more complex problems, I think the parent is referring to engineering problems, not mathematical problems. And in this case quantity has a quality all its own. Yes, 1000 people in a bunker could in theory do the calculations necessary to refine airframes or planetary scale weather modeling, practically they would be impossible economically and would never be solved