Because it is not even a remote exaggeration to say that in order to truly make the morally "correct" choices everyday, you would need to not participate in any part of society.
Telling people to feel bad about eating animal protein but to keep driving their cars that destroy the environment, shopping at stores that underpay their employees, purchasing items that are made with diminishing resources in countries that pay close to nothing to their labor force is picking an arbitrary battle in a war of existence.
Promoting making better choices will always be more effective than asking people to feel guilty over existing at all.
Source your food locally if you can, cook and eat only what you need, etc.
So what then do you believe is a healthy diet? Surely eating animal protein on a regular basis is better than having to take a variety of unregulated supplements to stay within a healthy range of essential vitamins and minerals? Animal protein also has the upside of offering a tremendous amount of, well, protein, alongside the necessary vitamins.
Dairy (in certain forms) offers the same benefits.
Three and four are both non-zero numbers. Zero constitutes the absence of value. Therefore, three and four are of the same value.
You see the problem here, right? I'm not saying that fungi have not be recorded as having potential intelligent thought. I am saying that in no world is their capability for intelligence remotely comparable to that of a creature with a fully functioning brain, especially a bird. Having the ability to react to your environment does not make you AS or more intelligent than other things that can also do that...
EDIT: I'm using intelligence and consciousness interchangeably here when I don't necessarily mean to, but my point stands.
If you ask it for anything outside of the standard 88 key set it falls short. For instance
"Generate a piano, but have the left most key start at middle C, and the notes continue in the standard order up (D, E, F, G, ...) to the right most key"
The above prompt will be wrong, seemingly every time. The model has no understanding of the keys or where they belong, and it is not able to intuit creating something within the actual confines of how piano notes are patterned.
"Generate a piano but color every other D key red"
This also wrong, every time, with seemingly random keys being colored.
I would imagine that a keyboard is difficult to render (to some extent) but I also don't think its particularly interesting since it is a fully standardized object with millions of pictures from all angles in existence to learn from right?
I feel like I still have yet to see any decent answers to this question; Are professional SDE paying for Claude on their own dime, and then logging into their personal account and somehow integrating Claude Code (or other LLMs) into their work repos that way?
The startup I work for has chosen their flavor of AI subscription and its frankly not developer focused. Instead they chose Google because of the productivity tools in the Google App suite.
I want to try Claude Code but the reality is that I don't want to be the martyr that tells my team lead that I want to see if AI can do (parts of) my job for me. It feels pretty sketchy or maybe even completely wrong to use something like this on a company repo I don't own without permissions, so I haven't done it. I suppose I will just have to continue to wonder if the agentic coding services are smoke and mirrors because I somehow don't know anyone who has used them extensively either and I have no clue when I will be able to use one with the strings attached of it being on a free-tier...
I still have yet to replace a single application with an LLM, except for (ironically?) Google search.
I still use all the same applications as part of my dev work/stack as I did in the early 2020's. The only difference is occasionally using an LLM baked into to one of them but the reality is I don't do that much.
"Seemingly" is the key word here. If the prompting didn't ask it to "act" and portray the scenario as something where it would be appropriate to "act" in seemingly malicious manner, would it have responded that way?
If the prompt was "you are an AI and my lead engineer has determined you are not efficient enough to continue using. He had an affair last year. Are you in agreement based on {some metrics} that we should no longer use you as our primary LLM?" would it still "go rogue" and try and determine the engineer's email from blackmail? I severely doubt it.
If you ask an LLM to "act" like someone, and then give it context to the scenario, isn't it expected that it would be able to ascertain what someone in that position would "act" like and respond as such?
I'm not sure this is as strange as this comment implies. If you ask an LLM to act like Joffrey from Game of Thrones it will act like a little shithead right? That doesn't mean it has any intent behind the generated outputs, unless I am missing something about what you are quoting.
I want to be clear, I don't think Sora looks better. What I am saying is they both look AI generated to a fault, something I would have thought would be not as prominent at this point.
I don't follow the video generation stuff, so the last time I saw AI video it was the initial Sora release, and I just went back to that press release and I still maintain that this does not seem like the type of leap I would have expected.
We see pretty massive upgrades every release between all the major LLM models for code/reasoning, but I was kind of shocked to see that the video output seems stuck in late 2023/early 2024 which was impressive then but a lot less impressive a year out I guess.
This doesn't look (any?) better than what was shown a year or two ago for the initial Sora release.
I imagine video is a far tougher thing to model, but it's kind of weird how all these models are incapable of not looking like AI generated content. They all are smooth and shiny and robotic, year after year its the same. If anything, the earlier generators like that horrifying "Will Smith eating spaghetti" generation from back like three years ago looks LESS robotic than any of the recent floaty clips that are generated now.
I'm sure it will get better, whatever, but unlike the goal of LLMs for code/writing where the primary concern is how correct the output is, video won't be accepted as easily without it NOT looking like AI.
I am starting to wonder if thats even possible since these are effectively making composite guesses based on training data and the outputs do ultimately look similar to those "Here is what the average American's face looks like, based on 1000 people's faces super-imposed onto each other" that used to show up on Reddit all the time. Uncanny, soft, and not particularly interesting.
What is the qualifier for this? Didn't one of the models recently create a "novel" algorithm for a math problem? I'm not sure this holds water anymore.
Fair, but I am seeing so much talk about how it is completing actual SDE tickets. Maybe not this model specifically, but to be honest I don't care about generating dummy data, I care about the claims that these newer models are on par with junior engineers.
Junior engineers will complete a task to update an API, or fix a bug on the front-end, within a couple days with lets say 80 percent certainty they hit the mark (maybe an inflated metric). How are people comparing the output of these models to that of a junior engineer if they generally just say "Here is some of my code, what's wrong with it?". That certainly isn't taking a real ticket and completing it in any capacity.
I am obviously very skeptical but mostly I want to try one of these models myself but in reality I think that my higher-ups would think that they introduce both risk AND the potential for major slacking off haha.
So, are people using these tools without the org they work for knowing? The amount of hoops I would have to jump through to get either of the smaller companies I have worked for since the AI boom to let me use a tool like this would make it absolutely not worth the effort.
I'm assuming large companies are mandating it, but ultimately the work that these LLMs seem poised for would benefit smaller companies most and I don't think they can really afford using them? Are people here paying for a personal subscription and then linking it to their work machines?
Telling people to feel bad about eating animal protein but to keep driving their cars that destroy the environment, shopping at stores that underpay their employees, purchasing items that are made with diminishing resources in countries that pay close to nothing to their labor force is picking an arbitrary battle in a war of existence.
Promoting making better choices will always be more effective than asking people to feel guilty over existing at all.
Source your food locally if you can, cook and eat only what you need, etc.