361–370 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Nazis would incarcerate people into work camps and turn them into soap or hang them in public squares, kind of different than what Elon did. There's a pretty big gap between doing something in poor taste like Nazi salutes in public because you have the intellectual maturity of a 12 year old edge-lord on Xbox live seeking attention, and being an a actual Nazi committing crimes against humanity. When everyone goes arou…
I don't know, but I found the recording uninspiring. There was nothing new for me. We've all seen reasoning models by now—we know they work well for certain use cases. We've also seen "Deep Researchers," so nothing new there either. No matter what people say, they're all just copying OpenAI. I'm not a huge fan of OpenAI, but I think they're still the ones showing what can be done. Yes, xAI might have taken less time…
Seems like the opinion of someone who doesn't know that OpenAI cloned Anthropic's innovations of artifacts and computer use with their "canvas" and "operator".
Off topic, but just in case: is there a good reference on how people actually use LLMs on a daily basis ? All my attempts so far have been pretty underwhelming: * when I use chatbots as search engines, I'm very quickly disappointed by obvious hallucinations * I ended up disabling github copilot because it was just "auto-complete on steroids" at best, and "auto-complete on mushrooms" at worst * I rarely have use cases…
I admit to having been an LLM sceptic from day one, but I have been using ChatGPT and Claude a fair bit to try and figure out what the hype is all about. I haven't really succeeded. Most recently I tried to use them both to solve a programming problem that isn't well documented in the usual channels (Reddit, StackOverflow, etc) and found it to be quite a disappointing and frustrating experience. It just constantly, e…
Off topic, but just in case: is there a good reference on how people actually use LLMs on a daily basis ? All my attempts so far have been pretty underwhelming: * when I use chatbots as search engines, I'm very quickly disappointed by obvious hallucinations * I ended up disabling github copilot because it was just "auto-complete on steroids" at best, and "auto-complete on mushrooms" at worst * I rarely have use cases…
Honestly, the main thing I've found ChatGPT to be useful for in my daily life is helping to translate what I write from my native language to the language spoken by most of the people where I live. But even then it only really works if you have at least a basic understanding of the language and can ask it to rewrite sections when you recognize poor word choices or awkward phrasing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's closed source and open outcome
So is asking ChatGPT to write your application, then open sourcing said application IMO. I see both sides here, but I don't think it's a hill worth dying on. The 'open source' part in this case is just not currently easily modifyable. That may not always be the case.
I think the two plausible answers are:
1. The person prompting (for example telling chatgpt 'please produce a fizzbuzz program') owns the copyright. The creativity lies in the prompt, and the chatgpt transformation is not transformative or meaningful.
2. The output of ChatGPT is derivative of the training data, and so the copyright is owned by all of the copyright holders of the input training data, i.e. everyone, and it's a glowing radioactive bomb of code in terms of copyright that cannot be used or licensed meaningfully in open source terms.
There are existing things like 1, where for example if someone takes a picture, and then uses photoshop to edit it, possibly with the "AI erase" tool thingy, they still own the photo's copyright. Photoshop transformed their prompt (a photo), but adobe doesn't get any copyright, nor do any of the test files adobe used to create their AI tool.
I don't think AI is like that, but it hasn't gone to court as far as I know, so no one really knows.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I absolutely hate the Elon hypetrain, but I also don't understand the social media hate I see for AI, like comparing every ChatGPT answer to one wasted bottle of water. Can we stop for a second and just marvel at a new piece of human ingenuity? Let's not give Elon too much credit, but I think that AI as a whole helps us all understand the nature of intelligence, and therefore humans' place in the universe. One of the…
LLMs don't make me question what we know about humans and thinking. They are really good at convincing us that they're good, but really, that's other humans building stuff to convince us that it's good. There is no intelligence here, other than the perceived intelligence of predicting words intelligent people have written previously.
I think this is my main point- isn't it amazing that a thing that predicts words other humans have previously written manages to appear intelligent, or, more pointedly, have utility in communicating real thoughts and ideas?
If you've ever asked an LLM a question and gotten a satisfying answer, that means that there is some human-level intelligence somewhere in the token filtering / recombinating that an LLM does.
Specifically I think the test of human-like intelligence is literally the output- If we get utility from the arrangements of the tokens it outputs, that in and of itself demonstrates that some portion of human intelligence could be this same token generation mechanic.
Off topic, but just in case: is there a good reference on how people actually use LLMs on a daily basis ? All my attempts so far have been pretty underwhelming: * when I use chatbots as search engines, I'm very quickly disappointed by obvious hallucinations * I ended up disabling github copilot because it was just "auto-complete on steroids" at best, and "auto-complete on mushrooms" at worst * I rarely have use cases…
I use it everyday. For coding, I use cursor composer to gather context about the existing codebase (context.md). Then I paste that into DeepSeek R1 to iterate on requirements and draft a high level design document, maybe some implementation details (design.md). Paste that back into composer, and iterate; then write tests. When I'm almost done, I ask composer to generate me a document on the changes it made and I doub…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because running a company is different to running a state and we doubt his intentions, not his skills. Someone that is not elected gets 8mill/day from the government now overseas the government with some 20-year old fanatics that can’t even put up a secure website for DOGE?
Yeah, most of the government isn't elected, that's how it works. You only vote for 3 roles in the Federal government (I guess 4 if you count the veep). The rest of them are hired. For those downvoting, the roles are President, Vice President, Senator, and Representative. Outside of that, everyone is hired / appointed.
Tell me you don’t know how the US government works without telling me you don’t know how the US government works, why don’t you?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel like that's part of what Elon is flexing. Teslabot was late comer compared to competitors like BD. Elon is showing off he can marshal enough resources and talents to be on par (kinda) with state of the art products in crazy time. That's been most of his superpower so far - not breakthrough tech that didnt exist before. We've had rockets before.
> I feel like that's part of what Elon is flexing. Teslabot was late comer compared to competitors like BD. When it come to bipedal robots, Tesla is far ahead of Boston Dynamics in terms of actually creating a product.
I suppose you can take that to mean that people who do have access to the service should not expect much in terms of data protection.