Is really a compete XOR lobby the government? The AI companies in the US do both, and nobody says "OpenAI can't compete so they do lobbying" or "Anthropoic can't compete so they do lobbying".
I was extremely surprised by this figure, so I checked the article and it's not "Renewables already surpass fossil fuel in the energy mix" but "Renewables already surpass fossil fuel in the electricity production" right? This is a massive difference. According to Wikipedia, fossil fuels were about 75% of the energy mix in the UK (to take on example) as late as 2024.
I never understood why they didn't use the Apple "UI". Where Apple presents fewer models (say N models), and when you select one, each is configurable for screen size/RAM/CPU/whatever (say K picks), yielding N*K possibilities, many Windows laptop sellers present a list of N*K SKUs where you need to triple check what the difference between SKU A and B.
Some Americans think the "democracy" vs "republic" distinction is extremely important, and that "democracy" means something like "tyranny of the majority", hence why it is good that America is not a _democracy_, but a _republic_ or a _democratic republic_.
Some other Americans (there is some overlap) also think that the US is so large and diverse that essentially its States are their own countries and the US is more like its own continent, and talking about the American _nation_ or even _country_ is meaningless. It is a union of States (though it is rare that someone argues that the US is not a country).
Some people feel that mass surveillance is wrong whether it is domestic or not. For those people, being ok with mass surveillance as long that it is not done to your kind is a morally wrong stance.
> What we have found: the model has strong internal constraints against harmful actions (consistently refuses things it flags as problematic), but the harder risk is subtler -- it can get into loops where it takes many small individually-reasonable actions that compound into something the operator did not intend.
Interestingly this has been well anticipated by Asimov's laws of robotics, decades ago. Drawing the quote from Wikipedia:
> Furthermore, he points out that a clever criminal could divide a task among multiple robots so that no individual robot could recognize that its actions would lead to harming a human being
>Asimov, Isaac (1956–1957). The Naked Sun (ebook). p. 233. "... one robot poison an arrow without knowing it was using poison, and having a second robot hand the poisoned arrow to the boy ..."
It feels like people accept this criticism when it props up their position - for an American (software) engineer, companies run by _American engineers_ vs companies run by American non-engineers is an obvious case of engineering is better (see criticism of Boeing); but when it's Chinese engineer vs American non-engineer, the "American" bit is more important.
Yes, but this is simply the remnants of the old tailor occupation, post automation. The talented old lady would have had a lot more business in clothes making in the past, no need for a wash & fold.
Being a tailor is scalable, that's way there are way, way more cheap machine produced clothes today than in the past. Surely he did not miss that the textile industry was at the core of industrial revolution. So being a tailor is more like a post-scaling job - the automation has already happened and now there are only remnants left.
But how can you be sure a job is peak-automated? A few years ago, I would have said musicians are post-scaling - way fewer musicians jobs now that you can play recorded music. But it looks like generative AI will hit musicians again. Can some of welding be automated? Probably.
The college explanation cannot be the full or even the main driver, because countries with free college (+ scholarships) have the same issue. Same for daycare pricing.
Meh. A hundred years ago, TinkerNews commenters would have observed that Western cultures are obviously better at running manufacturing plants, because at the time the West were where manufacturing happened.
Don't they have a partnership with the French Armed Forces? I am sure they are interested in automating Russian Audio or Text (-> Russian Text) -> French text.
Definitely maybe - but then we are discussing (2), i.e. "what is the right technical solution to solve (1)".
Your previous comment was arguing that (1) is great (which no one denies in this thread, and it is a different discussion about what products are desirable rather than how to build said product) in an answer to someone arguing (2).
You could have a program, not LLM-based but could be ANN, for flying and an LLM for overseeing; the LLM could give the program instructions to the pilot program as a (x,y,z) directions. I mean currently autopilots are typically not LLMs, right?
You describe why it would be useful to have an LLM in a drone to interact with it but do not explain why it is the very same LLM that should be doing the flying.
Not German so I can only talk about how it is going in another country:
- Massive change in the average household size: way fewer people live together now (delayed couple & family formation, divorce, etc.). If you go from 4 people per household to 2 people per household, now you need twice as many homes.
- Massive internal migration: declining population in a lot of rural areas and increasing in cities & their suburbs. So lot of empty houses and super cheap houses in Dumbfuck, Nowhere but scarce & expensive homes where people want to live.
Completely unrelated. Laffer curve is total tax returns as a function of tax rate (usually used to show that at some point T = t*Y(t), where t is the rate and Y is the taxe base, dT/dt < 0).
This is about how Y works, not as a function of t but of, well, everything else.