401 karma · joined May 15, 2025
And what if you could? What if you could give a space secure enough it could have direct control over your bank account. It may do something dumb but it's boundaries are beyond the agent.
It could use your routing number and run your gmail without risk of abusing the routing number.
My main wonder is the difference between it and having a small llm no thinking output a single number only as a choice. Isn't that nearly the same here?
I have always felt ultra minimalism is partly a way of fighting bugs. Why can't we put more effort to make every site a great experience in of itself?
Been experimenting with going way beyond my usual frontend work for something truly special. This made me think if it. It's 10x the effort but that's about the same effort I put in before manually making a minimal one.
I want more koi fish swimming around my saas.
I think it's more socialist/communist motivation to seize production I don't think they care about the rich as much as control.
Read somewhere that SF spends roughly 50k$-80k$ per homeless person per year.
Taxing more doesn't solve a massively inefficient system at it's core. Just like US education, we spend more than any country on earth, why is it still bad?
Answering that question with a "if only we had more money" is a really poor argument. The CA tax fundamentals are bad, pooring more cash onto the fire will not fix that.
Putting in massive effort with AI leads to quality exactly like before hand coding.
Vast majority of work was junk before AI because vast majority of people put the minimal possible effort.
The difference now is that AI can make low effort work look high effort at a surface level.
The internet was pretty important afterall even with a bubble.
You're right though they largely are "smart" in the 80's computer sense. This is largely due to continual learning being unsolved.
BUT the more you look at them, research, and try experiments there's something there not in a 80s computer. If I had to guess maybe 1-5% of a humans ability but it's there. They are able to do novel things but ever step outside of their distribution takes exponential effort for every small addition. There is a true ability to adapt and learn new things on the fly, things never seen before. That is the the smart part. There something hidden in these things we don't understand that allows novel insights built from in context learning.
It's actually measurable in experimental settings but even there it's hard to tease out. I saw it mostly while doing CL training experiments. But I also see it while working with them for coding novel things.
But the more power we provide and farther down the road of this we go those 1-5% are things like solving unsolved math problems. No human solved these things. You say brute force, I say it needed massive effort to break out of it's distribution and get those small insights. It's very human like when taken at scale. The scary thing is that scale is getting smaller every day.
Today it cost massive effort but it's possible 10-20yrs from now an AI could solve a problem like this in under an hour with a single thread on a free subscription paid for by serving an ad.
These arguments are so weak because you'll then have to make the same one a few years from now when it does something else impossible. The argument only stands if we assume no progress will occur.
Sythetic data works in a bounded box we have mapped you can't just make up novel data and it works.
Model collapse is completely unsolved.
Astra goes farther than any model before but it cannot go forever.
"Given infinite thinking time a finite number of humans will solve all theorems"
I also love the angle that this was not intelligence just brute force. As if the mathematicians didn't reeaaally want to solve this they were just too lazy to give it a good try.
What does AI have to actually do before you realize these things are actually smart?
In a world of perfectly rational actors you could say "it's still better than the coal plant" but your point is true for the real world and makes much more sense.
Clearly it's the cost AI leaders will have to pay after spending years telling everyone they will die and lose their jobs. They wanted the publicity and with it comes what they sow.
Suprised and glad you responded.
If you solve it then yes humans are toast mental usefulness wise
Your suggestion on this is mitigation then?
Take an aluminum or concrete plant. I see it as a hard argument to give to these companies that they are somehow special and therefore should do more to their already low impact "factory" If we compared these to large scale steel mills for example. I agree with your point that mitigation can help public opinion but on the opposite side I don't see how you can make a reasonable argument to the builders that this is actually worth funding?
Their troubleshoot support tool must be the same team that makes it on local windows troubleshooter because literally every single time you use it, it spins for 10min then says it can't fix anything.
So there's truth in the statement afterall. Clearly a powerful PR campaign going on because there is soooo many dumb takes this kind of argument vanishes.
I do think that amoung all our water uses this is easily the nicest amoung them. I think datacenters are the new factories and as far as factories go they are the cleanest ones ever made. But I suppose if you have the impression AI is useless then it makes sense. But if this is america's future industry we should make room. These centers are even funding infrastructure upgrades. To me they are the closest thing we'll get to reindustrialization in our lives and I would still want a stronger push for even more aggressive buildout.
Only layer beyond this I want is the permission scoping, stronger sandboxing per session and centralized control. I have not seen a clean product around this though where I own the compute.
Couldn't you hook it up to a multiple choice exam?
It's still LLM like, how smart is it? I'm wary of something that the company states they don't want to benchmark it across public benchmarks.
Is this a pure TPU infra? Really high performance solid intelligence.
I don't judge you for not growing your own food when you hand me a burger.
You can make the argument that "high" math has no function value which is fair.
But I would not agree.
The simple fact that you're comparing art to mathematics is making my point for me.