mvkel

7 ms·

1.
by mvkel 7d ago
apple needs to rethink so much more fundamentally. Ternus talks identically to Tim Cook. Indistinguishable. It’s like when Jobs left, Apple became a reflection of the superficial touchstones that Jobs left behind, rather than the CEO defini
2.
by mvkel 8d ago
A person needs to die for us to assign liability and pursue justice. If fewer people die, there is no liability to assign. It sounds like you're arguing for a human being to die to preserve a human being to blame. Which yeah, sounds ju
3.
by mvkel 9d ago
What you're talking about is who to blame, not how to keep more people alive.
4.
by mvkel 9d ago
It should be a defense for FSD to exist though, right? Net more alive people.
5.
by mvkel 9d ago
So you're saying temporarily cutting off internet access in a specific geographical region is destroying the internet?
6.
by mvkel 10d ago
> The internet has already been turned off in localized areas This is an oxymoron.
7.
by mvkel 10d ago
The Internet virtually indestructible against people smarter than a toddler. It's already impossible to turn off. We would need to prevent the models from getting smarter.
8.
by mvkel 10d ago
This is some Terminator version of destroying humanity, but a super intelligent AI could be much more insidious, and simple. It looks a lot more like social engineering. One easy, obvious example that has also been explored a thousand times
9.
by mvkel 11d ago
There are plans up through ARC 7 on the roadmap
10.
by mvkel 11d ago
If you read what ARC-AGI has stated from day one, the tests are designed to stress frontier models in tasks that humans are uniquely good at. When the models get to 100%, the next set of tasks is deployed. When they run out of ideas for how
11.
by mvkel 13d ago
Take it from the mouth of the creator of ARC-AGI: When we released ARC 3, I got asked, "when do you think a frontier model will saturate it?", and I answered "in about a year, though it depends on how much it gets explicitly
12.
by mvkel 13d ago
The ARC-AGI-3 score is an incredible feat. It needed to effectively create a symbolic world model from scratch to solve the games. If you've played the games firsthand, you know what an accomplishment this is. The "games" fee
13.
by mvkel 20d ago
I'm kind of surprised, but not surprised, by Gates' comments here. Until very recently, apparently, he was a pretty strong techno optimist, now toeing the line of a doomer. The verbiage is substantially in line with the fear-based
14.
by mvkel 20d ago
If there are 10 people on a social network, are you allowed to call it "curated"?
15.
by mvkel 1mo ago
Netflix had an algorithm contest, when was it, like 20 years ago? A team made a highly effective content recommendation system and Netflix never used it. Why? It killed revenue. Separately, there simply isn't enough content to recommen
16.
by mvkel 1mo ago
They launched their model a week ago, completely closed, selling an endpoint. Then when nobody bought, they "open" sourced it. Ok.
17.
by mvkel 1mo ago
This reads similar to a politician saying "I was hacked!" when embarrassing texts leak.
18.
by mvkel 1mo ago
TLDR: content is AI generated whether you think it is, or not. https://news.adobe.com/news/2026/06/creators-toolkit-report-... https://manuscriptreport.com/data/ai-publishing-statistics
19.
by mvkel 1mo ago
> a lot The data disagrees.
20.
by mvkel 1mo ago
Actions matter more than words. Sure, they're complaining about AI, but consuming AI content more and more. It's a bit like people who complain that everything on the news is always bad. Everyone hates it, yet it's what every
21.
by mvkel 2mo ago
Things are constantly changing. For example, a new building might have two or three tenants, so entire floors can be skipped. But then five years later, the whole building is full. I would bet that every new algorithm after LOOK is just dif
22.
by mvkel 2mo ago
I don't get it. We're snobs about facts being more accurate? In a system that is innocent before guilty, more accuracy favors the person.
23.
by mvkel 2mo ago
Now imagine dumping the corpus of this case into an LLM and asking it to find discrepancies. I'll bet your bollocks to a barn dance that it'd point out the extra underscore. This is yet another example of human confirmation bias l
24.
by mvkel 2mo ago
That's a good point, but this isn't just one student; it's EVERY student (oh god I sound like AI)
25.
by mvkel 2mo ago
I'm not disputing that students cheat using AI, and that professors catch them and enact consequences. But this video is a little suspicious. The fact that none of the 32 students bothered to even read the generated output feels strang
26.
by mvkel 2mo ago
My point was that it was critiquing a development process from 2023 in 2026, regardless of the term used.
27.
by mvkel 2mo ago
All of these complaints are about humans making user-hostile decisions, not AI. And software quality is not a reflection of its code quality. Never has been.
28.
by mvkel 2mo ago
> This was just before Claude Code was released so this wasn't full agentic hands-off engineering. Instead, I broke down the development into lots of small tasks and went through them manually with the AI, testing each change as I w
29.
by mvkel 2mo ago
So OpenAI calling Anthropic out on their fear based marketing is an unqualified statement? Have -any- of Anthropic's concerns of imminent disaster passed muster?
30.
by mvkel 2mo ago
The most important prompt lesson everyone should take away: never ask yes / no / leading questions. Almost all of Tao's questions begin with what, or why. That forces an open ended response, which is a great way to reduce or

More ›