So, I am saying Capitalism is the cause, not the solution. Capitalism concentrates wealth and you need a redistribution system if you want that to not result in child poverty. It's not rocket science.
This argument warrants introspection for "crusty devs", but also has holes. A compiler is tightly engineered and dependable. I have never had to write assembly because I know that my compiled code 100% represents my abstract code and any functional problems are in my abstract code. That is not true in AI coding. Additionally, AI coding is not just an abstraction over code, but an abstraction over understanding. When my code compiles, I don't need to worry that the compiler misunderstood my intention.
I'm not saying AI is not a useful abstraction, but I am saying that it is not a trustworthy one.
Exactly. All of the people in comments here thinking this has any impact on right to repair or open source are thoroughly kidding themselves. Lawmakers don't get out of bed in the morning to fight for nerds or the working class.
Fully agree. Also inherent to the design is distillation and interpolation...meaning that even with perfect data and governing so that outputs are deterministic, the outputs will still be an imperfect distillation of the data, interpolated into a response to the prompt. That is a "bug" by design
Ignoring how ridiculous and impractical this idea is, it fails to capture some of the most important skills in being a developer. Framing real-world problems as code problems. Anticipating design issues. Knowing the right trade-off between solution correctness, complexity,and effort. Mentoring and accelerating others. This is barely different than leetcode interviews.
Yes, but it does limit the impact of the attack. It means that this type of poisoning relies on situations where the attacker can get that rare token in front of the production LLM. Admittedly, there are still a lot of scenarios where that is possible.
...but sure, for the sake of argument, maybe it's only a quarter million lbs of kerosene 50 times a year, upper atmospheric pollution, and LEO crowding that gets solved by HN comments. ...instead of a dumb cable that doesn't come with a side of funding a billionaire neo-nazi. My bad.
Per the article, Starlink runs 8k satellites with an average life of 5 years. They launch in payloads of 20-40 satellites. That's 50+ launches per year if everything goes perfectly. About a million pounds of kerosene per launch. Plus everything else that goes into the rockets and satellites. Then the pollution impact from the launches and reentries. Then the eventual need to clean up LOE to avoid Kessler Syndrome. So yeah, well understood ground tech may be cheaper over the lifecycle. At a minimum, it should be a reasoned choice, not environmental debt pawned off by the richest man in the world.
If we wanted to subsidize internet for rural and low-income communities responsibly, we could invest in fiber and other solutions, and control the externalities (this is exactly the ReConnect program is). Starlink is not that, it is a classic case of privatizing profits by socializing hidden externalities, in this case to the entire world. Externalities in the form of pollution that will cost us all more than fiber in the long run. Funny story though, Starlink was awarded a $900M subsidy to provide rural USA internet access. In the end, that money was not given because the FCC found that Starlink "failed to demonstrate that the providers could deliver the promised service.". So no, it is not about screwing rural people, it's about not getting taken advantage of by fat cats and grifters like Elon.
Ok, not peeking at the comments yet, but I am going to predict the "put more AI on it" people will recommend solving it by putting more AI on it. Please don't disappoint!
I mean, it sounds like reviews and tests are already their standard practice, and explicitly part of their AI practice. So it should have worked, right?
I don't think most commenters have read the article. I can understand, it's rambly and a lot of it feels like they created a thesis first and then ham-fisted facts in later. But it's still worth the read for the last section which is a more nuanced take than the click-bait title suggests.
If you want server-side compilation, you could just run the xslt transform in ci/cd. It would still be a simpler solution than Jekyll in some regards, but I probably wouldn't do it for more than hobby projects
Either way, to be clear: the 28.4% -> 22.4% is human performance vs human performance (before and after "exposure to AI"). There are no numbers provided on accuracy with the use of AI.
Except the paper doesn't say that the doctors + AI performed better than doctors pre-AI. It is well documented that people will trust and depend on AI, even if it is not better. It is not clear in the paper, but possible that this is just lose-lose.
Using the formula for black hole density, a black hole of this mass would have an average density about the same as the near-vacuum atmosphere of Mars(!)
No, whether this tech could lead to a post-scarcity future is debatable. The naive part is thinking that it will lead to it, given the way we use it and the power structures that profit from it.
Is it confirmed that synthetic data was used for gpt-oss training? I didn't pick up on that in the press release or see it elsewhere. Did I miss it or is Sean speculating that it is the case?
The idea of US private efficiency is overblown. It doesn't take long working in a large US company to see massive delays, red tape, duplicate work, self-sabotage, or favoritism. Even when it is fast, that doesn't equate to efficient. It's not uncommon to see 8 figures put into throw-away work.
"AI" is just a misleading and unhelpful term, exactly because it causes people to assume that there are properties we associate with intelligence (abstract thought, planning, motivations, emotions) present in anything given the term. That is easier to correct when someone is referring to a logistic regression. I think that "AI" has clung to LLMs because they specifically give the illusion of having those properties.