Which "frontier models" are you familiar with in a programming context?
I'm a staff engineer and the amount of work and even troubleshooting the latest crop of LLMs can do at my behest is jaw-dropping.
I perused your comment history, and you refer to models as 'ChatGPT', which doesn't really inspire much confidence that you know what you're talking about.
People keep telling you that you're behind and using old technology and that the most recent models are really good and a sea-change because, well - they are.
Sorry, but you aren't familiar with frontier models if you think it's not "good enough". The latest models are quite a bit more capable than most people in many regards already.
>As long as the term “AI” means by-and-large LLMs with additional features sprinkled on top, the answer is no. More likely (without careful vetting by the folks aggregating these models) is that the quality will go down as more and more AI-generated output gets subsumed into these models.
Nope. This isn't how it works.
AI progress has largely been synthetic and has produced leaps and bounds capabilities increases in the last couple of years.
Paying people less and replacing them with AI is the literal explicit strategy; I get that this was supposed to be a cynical comment but it's basically just factual.
Thanks; I read the story you linked. It mostly reads as a hit piece centered around various legal allegations tied to stringent confidentiality agreements. There isn't much substance beyond that. The article briefly discusses some vague customer complaints about allulose-directed side-effects from his 'longevity mix', but the actual complaints are incredibly vague and you could attribute side-effects to or from basically any supplement. The article is basically a long-form screed saying over and over "he makes you sign confidentiality agreements".
I don't like Bryan Johnson per se, I just don't think that mal-intent has been substantiated.
For your second claim, I had to use ChatGPT to source it. It turns out that there was a problem with an earlier batch of one of his many supplements being out of spec per the COA. This is common and not unusual. He provides lab testing and COA for his current supplements. The unusual part is that anybody even ever knew his supplements were out of spec because companies don't really publish COA - and people knew because he did publish COA.
His protocols are usually pretty robustly researched. The worst thing you can say about Bryan Johnson is that I personally believe he over-indexes on suspect science, but that's it.
Every modern workflow implicitly relies on that. No infrastructure is fully robust. There's a senior DB person who has learned many things many times over who could bring down most of the US power grid.
They're not merely 'making something cheaper'. They're actively violating the terms of service using deceptive means. This is a trade-secret/DMCA violation. You're not allowed to use computers to do stuff like that. It's against the law.