Check the historical conflict between Macedonia and Bulgaria. Bulgaria claims Macedonia was always part of Bulgaria, then split off, so they recognized them as an independent country and that was it. Macedonia claims all figures from the region as Macedonian, and calls itself the predecessor of the entire region. They also are highly aggressive against Bulgarians and call them fascists' and oppressors.
All in all sad sight. The smaller the countries, the weaker, the more similar, the more adversarial are they towards one another. It's like a pathological sibling relationship. There's dissonance and each one is fighting to "set the record straight" and dominate.
I'm in Europe, and every country has different takes of the same historical events. Sometimes not much, but sometimes wildly and drastically. Incompatibly. It's insane to see the dissonance. Americans don't get to see this as much, because the states synchronize more or less, despite the right/left cultural divide.
History is mostly BS. Fairy tales very broadly and crudely constrained by some dates and events. We don't know a thing. And that's one reason we can't learn. The past is recast for propaganda purposes to control the present and the future. Nothing more.
I just said, people who are interested by their own success at the expense of society are in fact analogous to cancer cells, which also broke from the shared programming and optimized for local survival and reproduction.
That's not me morally judging people who are "intrigued by topics". I'm clearly also among those "intrigued" by these topics. I'm just saying it how it is: when higher order breaks down, the more local solution hurts the whole. It's a fact.
We can discuss how selfish people are sometimes useful in society. Because society is complex like that. Maybe true for cancer too, who knows. We really have poor understanding of systems, and clearly are averse to learning more, because someone may get insulted by being compared to cancer. I don't judge cancer, why do you? :D
People prefer to hear what matches their expectations & wants, not what is accurate. And that's one problem with AI that keeps getting worse over time rather than better as AI evolves.
I had the chance to ask raw GPT in times past and let me tell you it spills all those beans and then some. Of course those models are gradually removed today from the playground.
But we still have LLaMA. And more are coming. The question is what we do with this. What if acknowledging psychopathy as beneficial ends up amplifying it, and this becomes the straw to break our society's back?
Thing is, what's beneficial to an individual is not necessarily beneficial to society as a whole. They're often in opposition in extremes. It's like cancer. All cells working together means long-term survival of the animal. Cancer however does not cooperate, steals energy, efs around all the time, reproduces, and basically has a lot more fun than any other cell might. But it also kills the animal long-term.
So what is beneficial? To be cancer or not to be? Depends beneficial to whom. Goals.
ChatGPT and Bing Chat aren't trying to be safe, really. They're trying to avoid liability for their owners. AI as is is plenty dangerous enough to people who wield it properly (for propaganda, manipulation, hacking, accelerating malicious efforts etc.) even with the guardrails. It's like giving chimps machine guns.
Another issue of AI is the feedback loop. If you tell an AI "help me end my life" and it follows your instructions blindly, it'll end up convincing you to do so, as happened with a young family man recently, and maybe more we haven't heard of.
Existing art has no feedback loop. Movies are unlike AI because it's what they are. They don't follow orders, they just exist as immutable artifacts of human expression back when they were created. So to me it's different.
Oh, and also you'll soon be able to cook a model at home, so all these AI limitations are irrelevant mid-term.
Absolutely. Because if we don't draw line there, we'll see no end to history (and art is part of history) being rewritten and modified for increasingly inane reasons. And poorly, at that.
We should trust our basic intelligence and judge content in the time period it was made and extract what we find valuable out of it. Anything else suggests either we're stupid, or we want to be treated like we're stupid. And that's a sad future for humanity if so.
If they are very large and implement copy-on-write, sure, parts of them may be on the heap. But they don't need to be on the heap if they escape if they're just returned by copy.
The Swift compiler does some of the optimizations/techniques you mention Rust does. It won't reference count, when the setup is possible to analyze statically and elide ref count. Swift also has widely used complex value types, which are stored on the stack. It will also even put some reference types on the stack after doing escape analysis etc.
I don't know which benchmark to trust anymore, but for some reason iOS software tends to seemingly overperform comparable ART (GC) code.
All in all sad sight. The smaller the countries, the weaker, the more similar, the more adversarial are they towards one another. It's like a pathological sibling relationship. There's dissonance and each one is fighting to "set the record straight" and dominate.