IMO this is all just great marketing. The government needs to keep the hype for AI going as long it can cause so much of the economy and stocks depend on it now. Unless they have cracked RSA or something, no model warrants such a restriction, period. Mythos has already been used by the likes of Microsoft, Linux etc. If no big security gaps were found there, what is the government so afraid of?
I use Opus everyday on my code. It finds security gaps, but nothing outrageous, and that's coming from someone who writes code that is nowhere near weapons grade secure. It finds mostly things that are technically bugs, but virtually intractable for exploits. Often things I overlooked cause I was lazy, like not synchronizing access to a shared pointer etc.
I'll never understand using AI/bot for customer support. IG is a well know platform. If I have an issue I feel pressed to connect with a support agent about it very likely is something a bot would struggle with, otherwise I'd just google. I understand there some grandmas who can do a google search, but the vast majority of folks reaching out for support are doing so because they have a real issue that can't be simply automated.
Furthermore, having a bot handle a hacked account is support ticket is just insane. Why tf would you put a bot there and give it permission to take action?
yeah this story smells funny. Also, given the popularity of the post, wouldn't their son immediately know it's them? If I truly wanted advice, I would hide the sordid details. I think it's a fantastic piece of creative writing.
It's understandable and even desirable that a new piece of code rapidly evolves as they iterate and fix bugs. I'd only be concerned if they keep this pattern for too long. In the early phases, I like keeping up with all the cutting edge developments. Projects where dev get afraid to ship because of breaking things end up becoming bloated with unnecessary backward compatibility.
Yeah strategy is weird. PyTorch and llama 1-3 were strong successes. Llama 4 was a dud but that happens sometimes. Google fumbles a few times before Gemini too. What I don’t get is why they didn’t prioritize those projects. They weren’t making money, but it was a solid start and a good way to get a foothold in the game. Instead they’ve gone balls deep in slop bullshit.
yes those are bottlenecks that world models don't solve. but the promise of world models is, unlike LLMs, they might be able to learn things about the world that humans haven't written. For example, we still don't fully know how insects fly. A world model could be trained on thousands of videos of insects and make a novel observation about insect trajectories. The premise is that despite being here for millenia, humans have only observed a tiny fraction of the world.
So I do buy his idea. But I disagree that you need world models to get to human level capabilities. IMO there's no fundamental reason why models can't develop human understanding based on the known human observations.
My 2017 macbook is basically brick. Crazy how just opening chrome sets off fans like a jet engine. How much cpu can checking gmail really use?
Foolish me is considering buying a new macbook this year. I have no choice because Apple and Microsoft will do everything in their power to ship the shittiest personal computing products every year.
Always negotiate no matter what. If you get an offer, it means the company WANTS you for something. Experience, skillset etc use that as leverage. Yeah, the market is tough but there's no harm in trying.
I work on social apps. The central issue with dating apps is incentives. The incentives to form long-term relationships go directly against profit. The incentives for the individual go against what's best for the group. There's a lot of prisoners dilema issues.
The only way I think to have a dating app that works is to have it run by non-profit with rational matching algorithms not geared towards profit maximization.
> You’d think this MIT graduate would wise up, but he never did
I don't think it's lack of wisdom but rather pathological hubris and a God-Complex. I've met kids like SBF at MIT. Very smart but at some point they think the rules don't apply to them. The've never failed before so why would they start now. After all, he was like the youngest billionaire, rich parents, good grades, top schools. Everything has gone his way so the thought of admitting failure was out of the question. The defense also took this weird strategy of painting SBF as incompetent manger who had no clue what his subordinates were up to. Who knows, maybe that will get softer sentencing.
TBH I wouldn't be surprised if he gets out after 2-3 years on "good behavior". those political donations have to count for something. He very well may have the last laugh.
The guy who thought that it was a good idea to put volume controls on touchscreen needs a spanking. It baffles me that some companies still think this is a good idea.