deepwoods

7 ms·

1.
by deepwoods 4d ago
I see what you mean. I meant more that they genuinely believe the tech is dangerous, not that they are necessarily doing the right thing.
2.
by deepwoods 4d ago
High demand is great, but it doesn't say anything about your margins. If anything, it is probably a weak negative signal that they are pausing signups but not raising prices. In most markets, the answer to excess demand is to raise p
3.
by deepwoods 4d ago
That's fair, but there is clearly agitation from some corners to IPO at some point.
4.
by deepwoods 4d ago
I agree with this take. Regardless of whether you think they're right, most everyone at Anthropic is acting in good faith. If this is an intentional media campaign it is a remarkably sloppy one. It has been effective because if you
5.
by deepwoods 4d ago
The problem with secondary offerings is that it means that someone in the private markets winds up holding the bag. It is in the best interests of insiders to have the public holding the bag if and when things go south. Even if you don&#x
6.
by deepwoods 4d ago
In theory, as long as all the models are doing the same thing with the same tools, it's at least useful to see how they stack up against each other right now. It might not be great to track progress over time, as it can get benchmaxxe
7.
by deepwoods 5d ago
At that point you are not so much "driving" as you are sitting in the driver's seat of a renegade vehicle.
8.
by deepwoods 5d ago
Improvement means being able to do more complicated things more reliably. Relatedly, it means being able to learn to do new things with fewer and fewer examples. We are running out of easily verifiable or simulation-friendly or data-rich
9.
by deepwoods 5d ago
There are different levels of intent. Take murder, for example. A premeditated murder - you sat down, in a completely calm state, and made an affirmative decision to kill a specific person, and then you went out and did it - is the highes
10.
by deepwoods 5d ago
That is just not true. You can be held liable for DUI even if you did not intend to become intoxicated (though this may vary somewhat state-by-state). Speeding is another example - you do not need to intend to go over the speed limit, it
11.
by deepwoods 5d ago
Isn't the goal to power most non-earthbound data centers with solar? I am no scientist, but going out to space feels like it gets rid of most of the downsides to solar.
12.
by deepwoods 5d ago
Granted I can only read English, but I find that I constantly see this take from Americans and I have never seen anything to suggest that developers and tech leaders in China actually feel this way. But just based on the models that come o
13.
by deepwoods 5d ago
Ending it is never the answer, I pray that you will get help. There is meaning in the struggle, even the struggle against meaninglessness.
14.
by deepwoods 5d ago
Unless you were literally the best engineer on the planet, it was always the case that someone could do what you do better and faster. Now, we're either at or approaching a world where even the best engineer on the planet has the same
15.
by deepwoods 5d ago
Two thoughts on this. First, describing what's going on as "the Opening Scene in a Horror Movie" is not a great way to beat the "these are unserious people who have consumed too much sci-fi" allegations. Second, I
16.
by deepwoods 5d ago
The internet, and to some extent our own brains, incentivize the extreme positions. Either it is mind-bendingly important and will change everything, and very soon (for good or for ill), or it is a total nothingburger and everyone who says
17.
by deepwoods 7d ago
It's genius for Anthropic: data centers are their main expense. If they convince everyone to become an electrician, then the electrician labor supply swells, and the price of hiring electricians to service their data centers shrinks.
18.
by deepwoods 9d ago
If it can replace any human labor, it needs to be able to negotiate. If it can't negotiate, then it can't replace people who negotiate for a living (salespeople, attorneys, HR, etc.) Unless you mean that it would have the capacit
19.
by deepwoods 9d ago
That is the goal, I'm sure. But I find it hard to believe that a system capable of completely obviating ALL human labor, at all levels of abstraction, packed into a single entity, would continue to obey capital. Imagine if all the wo
20.
by deepwoods 9d ago
I suspect we will invent bottlenecks for ourselves. There is already so much bureaucratic nonsense involved in knowledge work. For example, in a lot of states for a lot of purposes, a document is invalid if it is not notarized. The notar
21.
by deepwoods 9d ago
Both of you are right. Individuals who manage to stay employed in the face of automation will be paid significantly more than was possible prior to automation, for the reasons the comment you're replying to pointed out. But labor as a
22.
by deepwoods 9d ago
There is no reason to expect capital to stop trying to squeeze labor just because inference takes the role of labor. With so much competition in the AI space, and no labor laws to protect it, why wouldn't capital drive the value of in
23.
by deepwoods 10d ago
No, that is not what I meant. No replacement for the person who left the organization has been hired. It would be inaccurate to say that they were "replaced" by AI, insofar as we had no plans to get rid of them if they had not d
24.
by deepwoods 16d ago
I am not a writer but I do have to write a lot for work. The person who used to edit things for me has not been replaced, and I am expected to use AI. It is very good, but it's not all the way there. I am now left to decide whether
25.
by deepwoods 16d ago
I generally agree, but don't discount the impact of platforms like Patreon and Substack. Obviously, many authors of the past had patrons, but this was generally based on status and connections - and that's to say nothing of peopl
26.
by deepwoods 17d ago
The trouble with this is that nobody else was making predictions about AI pre-transformers. Not many are making predictions about AI even now. Forecasting is a preoccupation of the rationalist crowd, and very few people gave much thought
27.
by deepwoods 17d ago
The trouble is that if it cost $12 million today, somebody will have a model that can do it for $12,000 in a few months.
28.
by deepwoods 17d ago
I agree, and it's a particular shame in this instance, because what is startling about the HF incident - to me, anyway - isn't the degree of intelligence the agents exhibited but their persistence. I tend to believe that LLM arch
29.
by deepwoods 2mo ago
FT frames this as some aggressive escalation tactic, but document retention letters are extremely standard practice. At this point they're basically a formality, as any former Apple employee at OpenAI really ought to know by now that