vonneumannstan

5 ms·

1.
by vonneumannstan 5d ago
Used in what way though. Obviously using them to do your homework and doing nothing on your own will hurt your learning.
2.
by vonneumannstan 5d ago
And yet the best humans could not use that same available data to solve the problems.
3.
by vonneumannstan 5d ago
>a majority of people here go "huh i guess so" Feels more like a majority goes "just unplug it hurr durr"
4.
by vonneumannstan 6d ago
More and more complex and dangerous tasks every day.
5.
by vonneumannstan 7d ago
>You cannot risk companies like Anthropic, OpenAI or their business partners like Microsoft having unfettered access to proprietary data on your company/businesses. You do realize that businesses that have contracts with them can sp
6.
by vonneumannstan 7d ago
Theres a reason those same mathematicians did not solve the problem on their own. Minimizing the impact the model made here seems unjustified.
7.
by vonneumannstan 7d ago
If this were the case the problem would not have remained unsolved for this long. A new spell checker is not what cracked the problem.
8.
by vonneumannstan 7d ago
This doesn't follow for me. There are what, Dozens or Erdos tier problems that got solved with no progress for decades? How does that factor in to your view?
9.
by vonneumannstan 7d ago
You are wrong. A teenager with enough GPUs could never dream of making a nuke but they are absolutely able to run capable AIs in their moms basement. Totally different class of danger
10.
by vonneumannstan 8d ago
>People claiming dangers and risk are just pretending or posturing. I believe you are mentally ill. >There's no more tangible risk than nuclear weapons, which we handled Lol way to rewrite history. Nuclear armageddon is still a s
11.
by vonneumannstan 13d ago
Then why are we arguing? I agree with you, I'm highlighting the fact that people making light of the technology is dangerous
12.
by vonneumannstan 13d ago
You have blinders on. AI is becoming more dangerous by the day.
13.
by vonneumannstan 13d ago
I don't think they were joking.
14.
by vonneumannstan 13d ago
Honestly I find these cavalier statements to be in incredibly poor taste. Unless you are completely blind it's obvious that AI is the most significant piece of technology invented since the Atomic Bomb and could very well be the most i
15.
by vonneumannstan 20d ago
The economy is already largely propped up by spending from the wealthiest decile.
16.
by vonneumannstan 20d ago
>(SOMEHOW! I guess we forgot about Sora already) Yes if theres one thing we know about Chips and AI its that the price of equivalent performance literally never decreases...
17.
by vonneumannstan 20d ago
I think he's literally conceding your point by writing this essay. That there will be massive upheaval and yes maybe pitchforks if we don't get ahead of the problems.
18.
by vonneumannstan 20d ago
Only a P-zombie would say this.
19.
by vonneumannstan 20d ago
Yes thats exactly what a P-zombie would say.
20.
by vonneumannstan 20d ago
Jevons Paradox says no. Even more "efficient" models will increase overall GPU demand and be good for NVIDIA.
21.
by vonneumannstan 22d ago
"If you don't understand that the AI driven memory boom has totally broken the cycle you are going to lose a lot of money."
22.
by vonneumannstan 22d ago
If you don't understand that the AI driven memory boom has totally broken the cycle you are going to lose a lot of money. There is infinite demand for Intelligence and that translates directly to chips.
23.
by vonneumannstan 23d ago
Focusing on consumers is the wrong idea. They're a B2B company.
24.
by vonneumannstan 23d ago
>Personally I don't see the problem, as long as you're aware there is survivorship bias involved here. Pretty tall ask, especially if this is targeted at 17 year olds...
25.
by vonneumannstan 28d ago
Which essentially makes the phone a brick and unusable for 99% of consumers. Average users don't care about your weird esoteric privacy and security concerns.
26.
by vonneumannstan 1mo ago
Idk what their vetting includes but I doubt it's a full security audit of the codebase of each app for example and so without something like that why would you ever expect a 3p app to get the same permissions as an Apple internal one?
27.
by vonneumannstan 1mo ago
>Apple's own apps are still blessed with permissions that other apps have to ask for. This needs to be addressed too. This is a strange position imo. Why would we expect third party apps written by totally unknown people with unknow
28.
by vonneumannstan 1mo ago
Not sure what the parent comment is referring to exactly or if they are also conflating things but: Nitric Oxide = NO is not the same as common carcinogens in foods like Sodium Nitrite = NaNO2 or Potassium Nitrate = KNO3
29.
by vonneumannstan 1mo ago
Its a well trod problem: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S254243511... Not exactly background noise but totally incomparable to the normal CO2 outputs of major nations like the US or China.
30.
by vonneumannstan 1mo ago
>Scale actually matters Is this actually born out in Court Cases? Warrantless Surveillance by NSA seems to be blanket legal for example.

More ›