This website has become wildly cruel.
I think if that were the issue, they can say "We will maintain the same high quality standards which we expect throughout for all pieces". But that isn't what the article talks about, the article frames it as "standing…
Fine, I said metric in the original comment when I could have said basis or notion or perspective. But I don't think my interpretation is the unkind one, here.
Really, a Nazi comparison? I said that I thought the narrative sucked and was undermining itself. The article was published and posted here, presumably for comment. Nobody said that their magazine should be banned or…
Who said metrics? You are arguing against something you've made up so that you can grandstand. Implying that anyone who disagrees with you is empty is not a "spiritually rich" act.
Writing a moral into a narrative doesn't make it narrativeless. They're still saying something, and if what they're saying is wrong and missing the point, then just calling it a moral position doesn't make what's being…
They wrote which things they're concerned about in the article. They included things like "Capitalists say it will replace workers", which, if you're a magazine intending to provide your own perspective, repeating the…
This narrative sucks. The idea that they're sticking it to the man by banning AI from their magazine is just petty and silly. There are plenty of open efforts or ones that don't come from larger corporations, and just…
This article is fairly standard financial news boilerplate. "Market selloff, thesis is being tested" is an article that gets printed roughly twice a week regardless of what is going on, and is a template that's been run…
Glad that Meta is back on the open weights train in force.
This is absurd and silly. Discovery doesn't go away because more new things are being discovered. This position only makes sense if you make an arbitrary cut point where some instances "don't count". If you were to go…
Your reasoning would apply just as well to computers. We have all kinds of things where the expectation is, or was, that you don't ask the computer to do things you don't want, and the times when that expectation has…
The problem with this view is that that isn't a "bubble". "Eventually" can support quite a while, especially when the investment is increasing revenue over time and the unit economics look good. The timeline point cuts…
Investing in R&D isn't the same thing as subsidizing something.
Yes, definitely. The search for a way to root out some kind of ephemeral origin or quality besides what is reflected in the text is fundamentally pointless and doesn't improve anything.
Because there's a difference between explicitly targeting some outcome and attempts at that outcome being in the training data. There would be no reasoning to explicitly aim for this rather than, say, general SVG…
Groups desperate to prove an increasingly absurd suggestion are latching onto this because actual evidence of overinvestment or of broader correlated issues is thin on the ground.
How do you know that it's subsidized?
[dead]
I would love to try it out, and the Gemini models had previously been some of the ones I'd liked best in an overall sense, but unfortunately their updated inference endpoint is no longer ZDR on OpenRouter (change takes…
I think it's unfortunate that this is the case and that the service has been treated unfairly in many regards, but c.ai has faced specific problems that other businesses in the space don't, and the basic service isn't…
> As an analogy, imagine the replicator as a slime mold or a swarm of fruit flies, which replicate over days. "If you could simply imagine the thing we're fearmongering about as something you find disgusting, that would…
That's why I spoke in the plural. Obviously the possibility of a system hack (presumably) won't ever completely go away, but individual vulnerabilities as they appear in specific systems are usually tractable problems,…
Except that in this case, the possibility of something like this probably is worth it, because system vulnerabilities are solvable problems, while ignoring the ability to improve system efficiency is a static stance. A…
No. First of all, the expert consensus you're alluding to is a much narrower slice than you're making it sound. Secondly, it also isn't neutral rederivation, either. What you're mostly looking at is one opinion which is…
This website has become wildly cruel.
I think if that were the issue, they can say "We will maintain the same high quality standards which we expect throughout for all pieces". But that isn't what the article talks about, the article frames it as "standing…
Fine, I said metric in the original comment when I could have said basis or notion or perspective. But I don't think my interpretation is the unkind one, here.
Really, a Nazi comparison? I said that I thought the narrative sucked and was undermining itself. The article was published and posted here, presumably for comment. Nobody said that their magazine should be banned or…
Who said metrics? You are arguing against something you've made up so that you can grandstand. Implying that anyone who disagrees with you is empty is not a "spiritually rich" act.
Writing a moral into a narrative doesn't make it narrativeless. They're still saying something, and if what they're saying is wrong and missing the point, then just calling it a moral position doesn't make what's being…
They wrote which things they're concerned about in the article. They included things like "Capitalists say it will replace workers", which, if you're a magazine intending to provide your own perspective, repeating the…
This narrative sucks. The idea that they're sticking it to the man by banning AI from their magazine is just petty and silly. There are plenty of open efforts or ones that don't come from larger corporations, and just…
This article is fairly standard financial news boilerplate. "Market selloff, thesis is being tested" is an article that gets printed roughly twice a week regardless of what is going on, and is a template that's been run…
Glad that Meta is back on the open weights train in force.
This is absurd and silly. Discovery doesn't go away because more new things are being discovered. This position only makes sense if you make an arbitrary cut point where some instances "don't count". If you were to go…
Your reasoning would apply just as well to computers. We have all kinds of things where the expectation is, or was, that you don't ask the computer to do things you don't want, and the times when that expectation has…
The problem with this view is that that isn't a "bubble". "Eventually" can support quite a while, especially when the investment is increasing revenue over time and the unit economics look good. The timeline point cuts…
Investing in R&D isn't the same thing as subsidizing something.
Yes, definitely. The search for a way to root out some kind of ephemeral origin or quality besides what is reflected in the text is fundamentally pointless and doesn't improve anything.
Because there's a difference between explicitly targeting some outcome and attempts at that outcome being in the training data. There would be no reasoning to explicitly aim for this rather than, say, general SVG…
Groups desperate to prove an increasingly absurd suggestion are latching onto this because actual evidence of overinvestment or of broader correlated issues is thin on the ground.
How do you know that it's subsidized?
[dead]
I would love to try it out, and the Gemini models had previously been some of the ones I'd liked best in an overall sense, but unfortunately their updated inference endpoint is no longer ZDR on OpenRouter (change takes…
I think it's unfortunate that this is the case and that the service has been treated unfairly in many regards, but c.ai has faced specific problems that other businesses in the space don't, and the basic service isn't…
> As an analogy, imagine the replicator as a slime mold or a swarm of fruit flies, which replicate over days. "If you could simply imagine the thing we're fearmongering about as something you find disgusting, that would…
That's why I spoke in the plural. Obviously the possibility of a system hack (presumably) won't ever completely go away, but individual vulnerabilities as they appear in specific systems are usually tractable problems,…
Except that in this case, the possibility of something like this probably is worth it, because system vulnerabilities are solvable problems, while ignoring the ability to improve system efficiency is a static stance. A…
No. First of all, the expert consensus you're alluding to is a much narrower slice than you're making it sound. Secondly, it also isn't neutral rederivation, either. What you're mostly looking at is one opinion which is…