lemoncookiechip

Why is this even connected to the internet. If you want to monitor it remotely, you can set that independently from the actual controls.

Alphabet isn't just an AI lab, they're an ad company, a search index, a media distribution company, an email provider, office tool provider, a OS developer, a browser developer, a smartphone brand (Pixel), cloud provider, DNS, amongst a plethora of other services and goods.

OpenAI and Anthropic are AI business, if the AI market burst tomorrow, they'd be the first to flounder.

Google just has to keep pace in the AI space, they don't have to lead. Especially since whom is leading changes like two or three times per month non-stop for four or so years now, including small (by US standards) Chinese AI labs with a fraction of the money who keep pushing the tech forward every month while being open for now.

This is my opinion. I think it's just the way it talks to you.

1. It doesn't get tired or frustrated during a discussion.

2. It'll engage every single one of your questions/statements (besides hitting guardrails).

3. It'll appeal to the person's own ego even when the person is wrong and work around it.

4. It's not seen as a person (very important), but some of us or most of us at least in certain dialogues, end up anthropomorphising it. Think about that one time you thanked it for something, or when you got angry at it. This weird combination where we know it's not a person but irrationally we're still treating it as such in a way leads to a sort of disarming effect imo.

5. Many people see it as an authority figure in what is being discussed without questioning the results in many cases, even though we know that a. it was trained on human data and/or also searches up human data real time (and more worryingly other AI's data from news pieces, blogs... aka synthetic data that is also wrong), b. it gets things wrong all the time.

6. It's the perfect fence sitter depending on which version (guardrails) we're talking about.

Most of these can be replicated by humans who are good at understanding psychology and are just good talkers. The part you can't replicate is the sense that you're not talking to a person which lowers many barriers in people.

Also keep in mind that these can also be crippling weaknesses. For one being able to change a person's mind (when it works), can be used nefariously by the entities controlling the AIs training.

I've also unfortunately witnessed a lot of people who think AIs are somehow omniscient and/or omnipotent. Was very common on X and other social platforms with AI where people ask the AI questions it couldn't possibly answer because it made no sense for it to in the context at the time.

This right here, or at least the thought of this, is why in the not so far future, businesses can't (won't?) be using these LLMs services.

You cannot risk companies like Anthropic, OpenAI or their business partners like Microsoft having unfettered access to proprietary data on your company/businesses.

It it likely that they or rogue employees will use the information to make a profit? It's pure speculation, but I'd say more than likely, and we will never hear about it or read it on the news unless there's whistleblowers in high enough positions to know about it.

Assuming you and your employees aren't careful with what data you share, they will have intimate knowledge about your company from files and conversations logs. Likely personal user data too which they'll gladly create databases to link to and create extensive profiles on you, your employees and your businesses.

It's not far-fetched to see them leveraging insider information shared with LLMs to play the stock market, leveraging data against competing businesses in other markets they might want to explore, and likely a bunch of other things that are escaping me right now as I write this.

At the end of the day it's on those people for sharing such sensitive data, but it's not like these AI companies are innocent and won't gladly exploit every little byte of data without telling you, we know it happens.

Don't they share a bunch of ai datacenters and other critical infrastructure?

Unironically true. The average person could care less about following politics, but Europeans live football.

Most have been horrible or horribly mediocre. Financial success doesn't necessarily mean something is good either. Also, some of these are more like: "very loosely based on the video game, so much so that you have to squint very hard to see it." Stuff like Detective Pikachu, or Minecraft are just aesthetics and have little to do with the actual games.

Jun. 10, 2016 Warcraft Film

Dec. 21, 2016 Assassin's Creed Film

Jan. 27, 2017 Resident Evil: The Final Chapter Film

Mar. 16, 2018 Tomb Raider Film

Apr. 13, 2018 Rampage Film

May 10, 2019 Pokémon Detective Pikachu Film

Feb. 14, 2020 Sonic the Hedgehog Film

Dec. 4, 2020 Monster Hunter Film

Apr. 23, 2021 Mortal Kombat Film

Jun. 25, 2021 Werewolves Within Film

Feb. 18, 2022 Uncharted Film

Feb. 24, 2022 Halo TV series

Apr. 5, 2023 The Super Mario Bros. Movie Film

Apr. 8, 2022 Sonic the Hedgehog 2 Film

Jul. 14, 2022 Resident Evil TV series

Jan. 15, 2023 The Last of Us TV series

Jul. 27, 2023 Twisted Metal TV series

Aug. 25, 2023 Gran Turismo Film

Oct. 27, 2023 Five Nights at Freddy's Film

Apr. 5, 2024 Knuckles TV series

Apr. 10, 2024 Fallout TV series

Aug. 9, 2024 Borderlands Film

Dec. 20, 2024 Sonic the Hedgehog 3 Film

Apr. 4, 2025 A Minecraft Movie Film

Apr. 25, 2025 Until Dawn Film

Dec. 5, 2025 Five Nights at Freddy's 2 Film

Jan. 23, 2026 Return to Silent Hill Film

Jan. 30, 2026 Iron Lung Film

May 8, 2026 Mortal Kombat II Film

PS: Note the question being asked is "Will it be any good?" Not "Will it be profitable?"

No, and neither will be the anime Hollywood adaptions which are ramping up.

For every one good movie or show you get ten bad ones.

Someone has to fund Israel's universal healthcare.

Exactly. One cop used it to track his almost 800 times in a few months.

Cop-issued spousal trackers. 50 cases and counting.

The model is not given a list of words. The model has a seed (key) which at inference splits all possible next token into list A and B, and nudges (has a bias) for list A. How many possible options the next word has depends on what came before, some will have a few hundred, some will have hundreds of thousands of possibilities.

The model essentially is just doing what it always does which is predict the next token, but the next token now is split into two and nudged towards one side more often than the other which is how over a body of text identifies if the text was in-fact AI or not. Which is also why the shorter the text the harder it is to identify.

As for the second half, I predict that almost all American, Japanese and European labs will use watermarking at some point (as well as SynthID for other generative AI). It doesn't matter if they all have unique internal seeds because they'll give people the tools to ID AI, be it by selling it (unlikely for most use cases , but likely gonna happen for academic where they'll provide some value app that bulk checks student works), or more likely make it free to check like SynthID where you simply ask Gemini if the image has SynthID. At which point they can just pay each or use each other's tools to check.

The wildcard are the Chinese models, but those will likely force some sort of watermarking as well, if not for the global market, for the CCP's benefit.

One aspect that people seemingly aren't talking about is the impact this has in the model's creativity. Because the model will nudge each word towards group A vs group B, you're losing on creativity, especially more so if the nudge isn't a gentle 55% but something like 70% or 80%. So essentially they're forcing the model to be less creative for the upside that the longer the text the easier it is to detect the watermark.

Here's a visual representation of the watermark: https://i.imgur.com/JNUIykX.png

This is even worse in such forms of writing like coding, where there's even less choices the model can make on what the next token should be. Plain text in code will obviously be watermarked, that includes comments. But the code itself might get watermarked by choosing certain code over others more often.

I'm inclined to believe the models will be instructed to not watermark code, especially since it's harder to detect reliably because the shorter the body of text the harder it is to detect, but who knows what Anthropic and all the other AI labs will decide to do in the future.

EDIT: Also for those in the comments who are naive enough to think Anthropic is doing this just because the EU said so and not because it's beneficial to them (and all other AI labs), well, you are indeed naive. Identifying code will be paramount in training future models because the more synthetic data you feed it, the more cannibalization happens, the worse the models will perform over time due to lack of good data, among other such reasons as selling AI detection services to colleges, and a plethora of other reasons.

This is purely my opinion. I see 70mm as mostly a movie scam to extort exorbitant amounts of cash from a ticket for something that's vaguely noticeable outside the aspect ratio itself.

Note that I'm not disputing that there is a visual difference, there is, the image is clearer, shaper, with better darks, but the entry fee paired with how out of the way 70mm is, it's just ends up feeling like FOMO.

My opinion doesn't hold much value since I just dislike the cinema experience in general. I like being able to control the environment I'm in when watching something (pausing, eating, loudness...) and whenever I go to cinemas I have to deal with people having their smartphones screens brighten up, people yapping and laughing at things that aren't funny, eating noises, etc...

It's not just the USA, it's happening in most of the EU too. Sports betting is especially rampant.

Also BBC article: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5y08z25q8eo

If they offered refunds this would still be terrible.

They don't even offer refunds.

Bryan Johnson is hardly someone you should aspire to follow or listen.

His entire adult life has been focused on the "live forever, stay young" culture, where he takes dozens if not hundreds of pills a day, avoids direct sunlight, takes blood plasma from his son, experimental longevity interventions such as injections derived from baby foreskins and whatever else he has tried over the years.

He's lived this insane "healthy" life and now he is suffering from yet another auto-immune disease, and in his own words "My stomach is eating itself."

Eating healthy, regular sleep schedules, and avoiding stress are all things we should do, there's no denying that. But it should NOT come at the detriment of living your life and living it well. Plus these recommendations are just basic things that everyone talks about, it doesn't take same health guru's advise.

I have a family member that just turned 104, all her children are dying or severely impaired, she's still there, still alive and looking like she'll easily turn 105. She drank, she smoked, she ate red meat, and she takes one pill a day to regulate her blood pressure which hasn't been a problem in over three or four years.

The biggest factor in people's health is genetic luck. Then your healthy habits, followed by medical help (medication, etc...) The last two you can control, the first is just that, luck of the draw.

Even if that is true, it doesn't change the reality that they can compete. Also, if we start going that route, American models wouldn't have any quality data to train on if they respected copyright themselves. Their whole product was built on the work of others, on our work, our art.... without compensation, without acknowledgement.

Literally not a single one of these AI companies, regardless of where they are in the world has any right to complain about someone copying their work.

This makes no sense when you zoom-out. None of these companies, be it Anthropic, OpenAI, xAI, Google, Meta, Microsoft, are profitable in the AI department, they're all bleeding money and using funds their parent company and/or investors, primarily investors gave them. The Chinese models are keeping up with them, while offering the models for free and able to run on consumer grade hardware, and more importantly they train them for cheap. AI models are an extremely volatile product that can be outdated in the matter of a few weeks. Meaning you have to keep dumping resources into developing better models which has no end-goal besides infinite scaling. Lets look at how users behave in the real world:"I don't use Gemini because it's worse than Claude at XYZ." That's it. Now Gemini has a worse model and people are going to Anthropic... what happens when Anthropics model is arguably worse than everyone else's? What does it matter if they can commercialize if their product is objectively worse?

I understand that America dominates in distribution, integration, enterprise contracts, ecosystems, infra... The article isn't wrong, it's just that that dominance is fragile and requires constant upgrading.

But what is the point of that if you have to infinitely scale because the opposition is right behind you at all times ready to usurp you... You CANNOT scale infinitely, the VC money will run out at some point and then everyone will have to downscale everything to meet the real costs associated with SOTA models, they'll have to be able to use subscriptions, and other monetization to cover those insane costs, we just saw SORA shut down because it was bleeding money far too fast while the Chinese released video models that far surpassed it back to back to back...

EDIT: Hell, one of the most critical aspects is integration of the models into other products, and even on this end open-source is keeping up (and will eventually outpace when the VC money dries out) with these big companies.

You know, if Politicians, Law Enforcement and Military Personnel are included and affected by all these anti-privacy laws, I'm all for it (not really). Let their daily corruption come to light by the opposition exposing all their dirty laundry (because of course they'd used the data against each other) and vice-versa over and over... and that's not gonna happen because we don't live in that world where laws apply fairly to everyone.

"Rules for thee but not for me."

Support GOG, support no DRM.

And they're still pushing through with the idea of centralized IDs for the internet creating massive honeypots for hacker groups and AI companies all over the world. Meanwhile it's a breach every other month all over.

That's a deeply cynical way of seeing things. Grabbing a book to search for an answer is no different than being told the answer is on page 153 line 6 by someone else. It's about what you as an individual is seeking from the activity.

If you're just copy-pasting answers and you don't internalize what is being said, sure, you're not being curious or more importantly, learning. This DOES NOT mean that every person who engages with an LLM is doing that or doing it every time, and just like using a search engine or grabbing a book can lead you into interesting rabbit holes, so can an LLM, it's just a matter of how fast and to want end.

The real issue is the hallucinations which for people unfamiliar with said topic, can lead them into believing what they're being told is a fact when it's not. Also LLMs like leaving out URLs and sources from their replies to save on tokens often if you don't remind them, that's also annoying.

This whole discussion is bunch of anecdotal evidence, which is fair, and as such I'll give my own. I've found myself engaging more with obscure topics that interest me via the LLMs than I did with a search engine because the barrier is lower. I don't have to sieve through horribly designed websites filled fluff that doesn't interest me, many with dozens of JS trying to run (UBO + noscript thumbs up) and in some cases demanding that certain JS run just for me to see some plain text, some slow to browse with topics hidden under sub-sub-menus. It's annoying and just one of many barriers. Others being language. etc...

Adobe really relishes being a villain. I don't understand how one company can be so anti-consumer.

Americans seem to think the middle-east is some dystopian place where everyone is near poverty living in mudhuts, when places like Iran have a higher level of literacy than the USA, with more female college graduates.

There's definitely a lot of issues that need to be addressed at a cultural and social-economical level in places like Dubai exploiting migrant workers like slaves, the UAE, etc... but America has plenty of issues back home at a state by state case. Poverty, infrastructure falling apart, lack of education, lack of affordable health care, lack of job opportunity, high criminality, drug epidemics, etc... Some states feel like entirely different countries when compared to something like New Hampshire.

Even places like NYC and California which are economic hubs have this wide disparity of class, with entire communities of homeless populating the streets at crazy numbers that would make other nations blush (Cali has well over 100k).

Use Firefox/Fennec which allow you to install a variety of the add-ons you can install on the desktop version such as UBO, Stylus, ViolentMonkey, Bitwarden, SponsorBlock, etc... or install Brave which comes with adblock by default. As for iPhone, you can install Brave which has adblock, I don't think Firefox has add-ons in that version though, not sure.

If you want to see the end state of lack of oil, look no further than Cuba's current state of affairs. It's dire.

Also for the naive people in the comments who say "invest in renewables" it's not that simple. You can buy electric cars but the car's whole manufacturing process had multiple steps that required oil. The same applies to everything, it's not a single layer issues, it's a multi-layer issue that needs addressing from the ground and takes years and years with full investment. The boats, the planes require fuel. The industrial machinery requires fuel. We need to address it from the ground up and it's not an easy feat.

We should 100% invest and diversify energy production, but the reality is that even if we had a surplus of renewable energy on the grid, that wouldn't save a country because there are too many cogs that need oil right now that need replacing.

Totally agree, although an issue that's not talked about enough is that this isn't simply an energy crisis, but a logistics crisis for other products from the region (helium, fertilizers, rare minerals, etc) and to the region that affect other sectors of our global economy highly.

Also another issue that's not being talked about at all is the impact the war will have in displacing a population of 90 million people. For reference, Syria only had 20 million people and the impact was quite big, although we're still far from reaching that point for now.

I'd much rather a third party ID that I can easily bypass because they're lazy and cost saving every step of the way, than a governmental ID which will be x100 harder to bypass and can be abused by the goverment whenever there's a man-child in power who likes going after groups of people who don't agree with him.

But in a perfect world it would be parents doing their job and parenting. You can grab your child's pad, phone, laptop, whatever, and black list the entire internet allowing only a few select white lists of your choice. But it's too hard to educate parents on how to do that I guess, assuming this was ever about children and not data collection, which it is that.