331–340 of 430 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One way I've heard it summarized: Computer Science as a field is used to things being like physics or chemistry, but we've suddenly encountered something that behaves more like biology.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think NVIDIAs future is pretty bright. We're getting to the run-your-capable-LLM on-prem or at-home territory. Without DeepSeek (and hopefully its successors) I wouldn't really have a usecase for something like NVIDIAs Project Digits. https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/project-digits/
Except I can run R1 1.5b on a GPU-less and NPU-less Intel NUC from four-five years ago using half its cores and the reply speed is…functional. As the models have gotten more efficient and distillation better the minimum viable hardware for really cooking with LLMs has gone from a 4090 to suddenly something a lot of people already probably own. I definitely think a Digits box would be nice, but honestly I’m not sure I…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is something I have been suppressing since I don't want to become chicken little. Anyone who isn't terrified by the last 3 months probably doesn't really understand what is happening. I went from accepting I wouldn't see a true AI in my lifetime, to thinking it is possible before I die, to thinking it is possible in in the next decade, to thinking it is probably in the next 3 years to wondering if we might see i…
> The intelligence that will be available to the average technically literate individual will be frightening. That's not the scary part. The scary part is the intelligence at scale that could be available to the average employer . Lots of us like to LARP that we're capitalists, but very few of us are. There's zero ideological or cultural framework in place to prioritize the well being of the general population over t…
We're racing up a hill at an ever-increasing speed, and we don't know what's on the other side. Maybe 80% chance that it's either nothing or "simply" a technological revolution.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It may have been in the form of a joke, but I certainly wasn't joking. I think it is interesting what actions cannot be done by humans.
I wasn’t joking either. Things are just getting started with this AI stuff, and I feel like programmers will experience that “de ja vu” phenomenon that they talk about in the Matrix, that eerie feeling something isn’t right. Look, why have game developers spent so much time lazy loading parts of the game world? Very rarely do they just load the whole world, even in 2025. See, the worlds get bigger, so even as the tec…
I like this version for at least two reasons:
1. It is 100% compliant with large quantities of scientific findings (psychology and neuroscience), whreas I believe yours has a conservation of mass problem at least
2. Everyone dislikes it at least in certain scenarios (say, when reference is made to it during an object level disagreement)
> 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.
Not to mention false GPS etc...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> My problem is: if most people can't work, who is going to pay for the product/services created with IA? A lot of those will probably go under, too. I think a lot of people are in for a rude awakening. The only people our society and economy really values are the elite with ownership and control, and the people who get to eat and have comfort are those who provide things that are directly or indirectly valuable to t…
> The only people our society and economy really values are the elite with ownership and control This isn’t true. The biggest companies are all rich because they cater to the massive US middle class. That’s where the big money is at.
It is true, but I can see why you'd be confused. Let me ask you this: if members of the "the massive US middle class" can be replaced with automation, are those companies going 1) to keep paying those workers to support the middle-class demand which made them rich, or are they going to 2) fire them so more money can be shoveled up to the shareholders?
The answer is obviously #2, which has been proven time and again (e.g. how we came to have "the Rust Belt").
> That’s where the big money is at
Now, but not necessarily in the future. I think AI (if it doesn't hit a wall) will change that, maybe not instantaneously, but over time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Now imagine where we are in 12 months from now. This article from February 5 2025 will feel quaint by then. The acceleration keeps increasing. It seems likely we will soon have recursive self-improving AI -- reasoning models which do AI research. This will accelerate the rate of acceleration itself. It sounds stupid to say it, but yes, the singularity is near. Vastly superhuman AI now seems to arrive within the next…
This is something I have been suppressing since I don't want to become chicken little. Anyone who isn't terrified by the last 3 months probably doesn't really understand what is happening. I went from accepting I wouldn't see a true AI in my lifetime, to thinking it is possible before I die, to thinking it is possible in in the next decade, to thinking it is probably in the next 3 years to wondering if we might see i…
Bedroom superweapons? Algorithmic propaganda? These things have humans in the loop building them. And the problem of "human alignment" is one unsolved since Cain and Abel.
AI alone is words on a screen.
The sibling thread details the "mass unemployment" scenario, which would be destabilizing, but understates how much of the current world of work is still physical. It's a threat to pure desk workers, but we're not the majority of the economy.
Perhaps there will be political instability, but .. we're already there from good old humans.
I'm strictly speaking never going to think of model distillation as "stealing." It goes against the spirit of scientific research, and besides every tech company has lost my permission to define what I think of as theft forever
At most it would be illicit copying. Though it's poetic justice that OpenAI is complaining about someone else playing fast and loose with copyright rules.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The intelligence that will be available to the average technically literate individual will be frightening. That's not the scary part. The scary part is the intelligence at scale that could be available to the average employer . Lots of us like to LARP that we're capitalists, but very few of us are. There's zero ideological or cultural framework in place to prioritize the well being of the general population over t…
> AI, especially accelerating AI, is bad news for anyone who needs to work for a living. It's not going to lead to a Star Trek fantasy. It means an eventual phase change for the economy that consigns us (and most consumer product companies) to wither and fade away. How would that work? If there are no consumers then why even bother producing? If the cost of labor and capital trends towards zero then the natural conse…
Whim and ego. I think the advanced economy will shift to supporting trillionaires doing things like "DIY home improvement" for themselves. They'll own a bunch of automated resources (power generation, mining, manufacturing, AI engineers), and use it to do whatever they want. Build pyramids on the moon, while the now economically-useless former middle-class laborers shiver in the cold? Sure, why not?
I found the discussion around inference scaling with the 'Wait' hack so surreal. The fact such an ingeniously simple method can impact performance makes me wonder how many low-hanging fruit we're still missing. So weird to think that improvements on a branch of computer science is boiling down to conjuring the right incantation words, how you even change your mindset to start thinking this way?
Wait, so the trick is they reach into the context and basically switch ' ' with 'wait' and that makes it carry on thinking?