jsnider3

This just isn't true. If it took the energy of a small town, why would they sell it for $20/month?

I like it, but giving Claude a "Deep Research" mode would be better.

Netflix's value comes from being convenient and compatible with the copyright system in a way sharing videos P2P definitely isn't.

Yes, high school boys and girls have clearly distinct handwriting.

If you're just filling in bubbles on a scantron, then handwriting isn't very visible and each person can just write their own name on the scantron they're submitting as their own.

What we should really is just have the government give artists money to make works for the public domain and then recover it from companies who use it with taxes.

Welcome to the neighborhood!

> In fact I don’t think we would need processors anymore if we were centrally storing all of the operations ever done in our processors.

On my way to memoize your search history.

This anti-intellectualism has a strong connection with Evangelical Christianity in America and the connection has a long history.

Subsidies are too low if we want Pennsylvanians to install solar and their state is doing that less than 48 other states.

Look, if Pennsylvanians want good things, they really need to vote for them.

I'm saying it shouldn't be that hard, but it's just one of a long list of features that the people whose job it is to do are working on.

Many ways. 1) Hire some humans to label the data. 2) Let the user give you feedback. 3) Ask another LLM.

We've only had ChatGPT and the like for a few years. It took Ford longer to make automatic transmissions.

Seems easy. Have a set of vague requests and train it to ask for clarification instead of guessing.

> Only the rich can afford such services.

Fortunately, AI solves this. Unfortunately, it also makes humans obsolete entirely.

I wrote code when I worked there.

> Do you believe that Goy/Goyim is similarly divisive? Or Kafir?

Yes, which is why I don't use those words unless they are immediately relevant to the subject.

If they want someone who can effectively oppose Trump, why would they pick someone he suggested?

He wasn't a Trump appointee. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_George

HackerNews users really hate when you just copy-paste LLM output.

There's enough disagreement among native English speakers that you can't really say any pronoun is the obviously correct one for an AI.

I only got half a sentence into "well-actually"ing you before I got the joke.

> Meanwhile there's no difficulty in "punishment": the operating company can be held liable, through its officers, and ultimately if it proves too anti-social we simply turn off the datacentre.

Punishing big companies who obviously and massively hurt people is something we struggle with already and there are plenty of computer viruses that have outlived their creators.

Yes.

You can ask a model to give you probability estimates of its confidence, but none of the frontier models were trained to be good at giving probability estimates to my knowledge.

That comparison isn't very optimistic for AI safety. We want AI to do good things because they are good people, not because they are afraid being bad will get them punished. Especially since AI will very quickly be too powerful for us to punish.

Homo Sapiens wiped out every other intelligent hominid and every other species on Earth exists at our mercy. That looks a lot like the winners (humans) taking all.

That's not what they did.

How does that work? Did GM suddenly decide there were too many black people in Michigan so they moved to Georgia?

The people who oppose foreign aid oppose aiding Americans also.