gallerdude

6 ms·

1.
by gallerdude 1mo ago
For some people, getting lung cancer reported a week earlier will save their lives. More importantly, if you can screen for cancer in a way that takes minutes instead of a week, imagine how accessible this technology will become.
2.
by gallerdude 2mo ago
Capable in term of AI R&D, not capable in terms of hacking (which caused all the Fable drama.) But agree, confusing wording.
3.
by gallerdude 2mo ago
But it wasn't explicitly told to hack HuggingFace. It was told "answer this security question", and it's answer was to break into the teacher's desk to find the answer key.
4.
by gallerdude 2mo ago
If the models were the quality of GPT-5.6, or Opus 4.8, would Meta really reap any benefits? Maybe in a zero-sum way, because OpenAI and Anthropic would lose. But I'm not sure they'd be that much more ahead either.
5.
by gallerdude 2mo ago
Staying at home is as entertaining as it’s ever been: video games, Netflix, don’t even get me started on short-form content.
6.
by gallerdude 2mo ago
The original comment was “open models are what kill OpenAI and Anthropic”, which to me is as silly as saying “Android is what killed Apple”
7.
by gallerdude 2mo ago
Android has market share, but Apple makes all of the money! I find it really funny when people attribute Apple’s success to “oh, the only reason they succeed is design and marketing.” Yeah, I mean factually speaking design and marketing act
8.
by gallerdude 2mo ago
Even in the world where all models are basically equivalent (a thesis I don’t buy, but will grant you for arguments sake) - I believe there is much more to the AI business than just training and running models. It’s a very new set of techno
9.
by gallerdude 2mo ago
This was a really fun visualization, so I vibecoded it. https://www.jackgaller.com/colorspace
10.
by gallerdude 2mo ago
Why would you use AI to write this post? If you can’t bother to write it, why should I bother to read it?
11.
by gallerdude 2mo ago
I think the question “would China cooperate” needs much more investigation. Everyone online pundit seems to think “obviously not”, but they’re people too with clear positive and negative incentives. It’s possible they’ve found a very simila
12.
by gallerdude 2mo ago
If you’ve done any software development at all, certainly.
13.
by gallerdude 3mo ago
Of course. But is it really impossible that Dario’s directive to the marketing team is “try not to make us look bad, but also be honest about our models’ capabilities, so people can stay informed”?
14.
by gallerdude 3mo ago
I think they're pretty happy to have government sharing some of the big societal responsibility, honestly.
15.
by gallerdude 3mo ago
Well it seems both Anthropic and OpenAI are consciously choosing to do this, which means, for now, neither plan on suing. So if no one sues, how could it be unconstitutional?
16.
by gallerdude 3mo ago
So let’s say you’re in Anthropic’s shoes. You see that LLM’s are getting better and better, and it’s very possible that they will have some impact on jobs in the next few years, and a very meaningful impact on cybersecurity. Is it more ethi
17.
by gallerdude 4mo ago
I really liked Dario's metaphor that in the 80's, we could have said someday we'll have "supercomputers", which can do all the calculations we did except WAY faster. When, in reality, the AI's just get smarter
18.
by gallerdude 4mo ago
I was a baby when the Internet Revolution happened. I was in high school and college when the Mobile Revolution steamrolled everything. It’s been interesting to see this one, as an adult working in the world. I wonder how far it will go.
19.
by gallerdude 5mo ago
I actually have no problem with the 5.x line... but if Pro really was an entirely new pretrain, they did a horrible job conveying that.
20.
by gallerdude 5mo ago
If GPT-5.5 Pro really was Spud, and two years of pretraining culminated in one release, WOW, you cannot feel it at all from this announcement. If OpenAI wants to know why they like they’ve fallen behind the vibes of Anthropic, they need to
21.
by gallerdude 5mo ago
I agree partially, but also misses the wonder he would have for: relaxing bathtubs, funny livestreams, wireless earbuds, huge libraries, and even globes. And yeah, you could make a list of struggles we have today he never did. But that’s ki
22.
by gallerdude 5mo ago
1. You can't understand the nuances, but there is a general pattern: new inventions may make us slightly less proficient at specifics, yet more powerful overall 2. Imagine a hunter gatherer is time travelled to 2026. You have lunch go
23.
by gallerdude 5mo ago
I’ve been thinking about AI robotics lately… if internally at labs they have a GPT-2, GPT-3 “equivalent” for robotics, you can’t really release that. If a robot unloading your dishwasher breaks one of your dishes once, this is a massive fai
24.
by gallerdude 5mo ago
But rolling your own can’t be that much cheaper than buying it from a leading lab. Especially when you consider the amount of spending on datacenters.
25.
by gallerdude 5mo ago
I’m sure there’s more to it than this, but it feels like Zuck has pet interests like VR and now AI.
26.
by gallerdude 5mo ago
I’m not sure. If it was open source, certainly. But 4th place doesn’t really matter if you have nothing different to add.
27.
by gallerdude 5mo ago
This would have been an amazing release 6 months ago. But the industry moves so fast, this is a trite release. Maybe it’s best for Meta to sell their superintelligence division. I don’t think Zuck’s vision is particularly compelling.
28.
by gallerdude 7mo ago
Tbf there was a 5.3 codex
29.
by gallerdude 7mo ago
My job may have become part of the training data with how much coverage there is around it. Perhaps another career would be a better test of LLM capabilities.
30.
by gallerdude 7mo ago
We used to get one annual release which was 2x as good, now we get quarterly releases which are 25% better. So annually, we’re now at 2.4x better.

More ›