Well they trained their model by scraping all digitised human knowledge and ignoring IP and CW laws so whats a little bit of corporate espionage in the grand scheme of things
I use it because its gives a good balance between intelligence, latency and cost
I won't claim to know everything about its history - I don't know any history about _most_ of the products I use
The 2 main criticisms I see of Grok are the Mechahitler comment and the CSAM image generation
on mechahitler - I'm no expert but if I remember correctly it didn't just do that unprompted, it was specifically asked to be politically incorrect. It's definitely bad taste to say the least but the guardrails were quickly tightened as a response
on CSAM - Again, X quickly stopped Grok from generating images of people in bikinis (which as I understand was the underlying problem). I never personally saw anything that I would consider CSAM (nude or obviously underage people rendered naked or scantily clad)
So these aren't dealbreakers for me and I'm not aware of any other high profile issues or incidents
The nature of LLMs is that an adversarial prompt will make the model output something inappropriate or outrage-worthy, and that's amplified 1000 fold for Grok because people are primed to criticise Must so will jump on any opportunity
Very cool. Good to see more axial flux motors in the wild - will be interesting to see if they become the new standard in future. With smaller material costs the cost to manufacture at scale could actually become lower than radial
I expect radial will still dominate for at least another decade or so outside of premium performance focused cars. Radial has been battle-tested and proven. Axial still has a few more years to prove it's reliability in the field. Higher loads and stresses, tighter tolerances could make the axial motors less reliable overall especially at mass market trims. Mercedes is probably over-engineering for reliability and performance on the premium car
Radial is also "good enough" for most applications. The efficiency, form factor and weight improvements of axial is nice, but they aren't the limiting factor. Radial is already highly efficient, reasonably light and small. The real level for weight is the battery
This is why there is so much interest in space based AI compute. It's not just SpaceX - Google, Anthropic and Nvidia have openly expressed interest
If you look at SpaceX plans and ambitions, they hope to deploy massive compute to orbit (multiple Terrawatts, hundreds of thousands of sats). If their ambitions even slightly materialise it would make ground based compute pale in comparison.
Whether or not they succeed in their plans is beside the point - the point is they know that terrestrial electric infra can't sustain the growth they need
No it's not. That statement assumes other corps care. They don't. If it was easy, everybody would be doing it. The fact that not everyone doing it is not because everyone else is not out of the goodness of their hearts
I've used it for a couple of years now and honestly the hype around it is really unjustified. It does the job but it's nothing special. I could go back to Jira and see no change in productivity after a brief re-orientation period
The whole armchair engineer debate online about this is hilarious
I'm just a software engineer, all I need to know is SpaceX is aggressively pursuing this - that's enough for me to believe it's viable
SpaceX operates literally orders of magnitudes more satellites than anyone else. If anybody understands the physics and engineering of space compute, it's SpaceX. Lay people debating this online is just showing their ignorance as far as I'm concerned, and it mostly comes from an emotional place of wanting Musk enterprises to fail
What they want is the massive user base, the data (Cursor has a lot of high quality coding data for training), the teams expertise in coding models and agents, and the Composer models
60 billion is a large number but these frontier labs are burning billions a month in compute alone, and SpaceX is IPOing soon so they'll have a lot of cash to spend
The fact that the whole thread has basically devolved into debates over if it is or isn't an LLM written article is proving well enough that it doesn't really matter one way or another
Capitalism certainly is hugely flawed and yet it is far less flawed than any other economic system we know of. Experimentation with the foundations of society is about as risky as it gets. You could end up with a utopia or you could end up with another USSR. History tells us which outcome is more likely
For a foundation AI lab with a world famous AI researcher at the helm though, it's not so impressive. Won't even touch the sides of the hardware costs they'd need to be anywhere near competitive
As a counter anecdote, my wife stopped using it because it is quite terrible when you ask it about current events. She almost exclusively uses the Grok app now because it has the "best" internet search and current events results
I don't think they meant literally cameras only can create reliable distance measures. At the risk of putting words in their mouth, I would guess they meant "cameras as the only input to a distance model". the "model" doing all the heavy lifting, covering the points that you quite rightly point out are needed
Several companies, most notably Tesla, have done this well enough to drive in all manner of traffic. I'm not going to comment about if lidar is strictly needed or not to achieve better-than-human safety, that's yet to be proven one way or another by anyone. The point is that cameras + local inference can do a pretty good job at distance estimation
Shame, shopping there felt like magic. I hope the technology is developed in future without having to rely on remote workers validating transactions. Definitely felt like the future of shopping