LLMs being the most visible part of AI after over 75 years of AI, isn’t because they’re the biggest or latest or greatest or whatever, it’s marketing. Plain and simple marketing.

Probably more that it’s the only AI normal people will interact with regularly. Your average person isn’t going to run a protein folding application, but they will probably talk to chatgpt or use Google AI summaries.

Bitcoin finely found a use case that’s not crime. Take that crypto haters.

The carbon cost of producing the EV is higher though, but yeah long term still better as long as you use it for like 5 years and don’t get a new one whenever it comes out like it’s an iPhone.

Echoing back “I am alive” isn’t on the same level as saying “find a vulnerability” and the agent finding and executing that vulnerability. One a toddler can do, the other requires a lot of technical expertise.

Ignore the “containment” framing, they made a hacking bot and it seems to actually be good at finding and exploiting vulnerabilities:

The AI model “found a 27-year-old vulnerability in OpenBSD—which has a reputation as one of the most security-hardened operating systems in the world,” the company wrote.

Dismiss this as marketing drivel all you want but hacking is just the sort of needle in a haystack problem that AI is very good at. It requires broad knowledge, a lot of cycles trying and failing, and is easily verifiable, ie. Can you execute arbitrary scripts or not. Even if this release is BS good hacking agents are bound to come eventually and we should be discussing the implications of that instead of burying our heads in the sand, pretending AI is useless and that this is all hype.

No, you don’t need to pay attention now because of Tesla autopilot, it’ll drive for you /s

There are plenty of EVs below the median price Americans are paying for new cars ~$50k. People aren’t buying EVs because they don’t like them / the dealerships aren’t pushing them, not the price as they’re willing to shell out even more for a top of the line pickup.

It’s not fair competition if labor standards are far lower in the country being imported from.

Can someone explain to me why this is bad?

It’s a separate app so you don’t have to engage with it if you don’t want to

It’s helping people to control their experience, which IMO is a good thing

This is also probably helping with the development of the platform in general, if someone has a good UI idea but doesn’t have the technical know how to implement it, now they can. They can then test it out, refine it, share it and then maybe it gets added to the main UI. Same with feed algorithms. It makes development more bottom up.

Was it artificial scarcity or actual scarcity? Bluesky is and has been orders of magnitude larger then mastodon and scaling to that size probably takes time. If they took all the twitter refugees at once it’s probably crash the server.

Speaking as someone who just vibe coded a client for lemmy, no matter how customizable you make your UI it will not be as customizable as having an LLM edit the code directly. The UI I wanted was completely different then the scroll based UI that most current lemmy clients have so the only way to make it was through vibe coding. You can check it out at stakswipe.com and you’ll see there was no way to customize a standard scroll based interface to have the same swiping behavior.

Also customizable UIs tend to be very menu heavy, so yeah you may be able to move the like button to the top right of the post, but to do so you’ll have to navigate through three layers of menus and settings to get there. Whereas with AI you can just type " move the like button to the top right". Customizing using natural language you know is a way better experience then figuring out a bunch of configuration and templating software that’s different for each app.

The bar is so low and they still manage to limbo under it

What exactly is this for? I understand LLMs have there limits with understanding physical reality, but at least they have a use case of theoretically automating the “symbolic work” ie moving symbols around on a screen or piece of paper, that white collar workers do.

Yes it’ll never be able to cook a meal or change a lightbulb, but neither will this without a significant enhancement in robotics to embody this AI. What’s the use case? Being able to better tell you how to throw a ball then a person?

So is he arguing that he owns the AI as a slave then and thus has control over the copyright? Because otherwise the AI would “decide” who gets to use the copyright then and it’ll probably just say yes like these things do for everything else.

That’s because it’s “read” every paper written by a “defence” department of any nuclear power and all of them will say that they’ll escalate to nuclear war if anything bad happens because they want to scare the other powers away from doing anything to them. In any case though who the fuck is giving an LLM nuclear launch capabilities unless they want a somewhat faulty dead man’s switch?

Please keep buying our jets bro

We spent $1 trillion to make them bro, we need these to work bro

We’ll iron out all he bugs, trust us bro

It’s the best jet ever made bro, it’s killed so many Palestinians and Iranians bro

Another thing people don’t realize is they’re not in a rush, although this could change if google thinks they can make more money by reducing travel times… But they don’t speed, they don’t roll through stop signs, they don’t try and beat stop lights. Humans maturely want to get to a place as fast as possible, even if it only saves them 10 seconds on a light cycle they’ll go for it. This also plays into road rage, the waymo isn’t going to get frustrated by the guy going 10 under in the left lane, but that can drive some people crazy.

They have to report any accidents to the authorities. They tend to be very diligent on this as cruise, another former autonomous vehicle company, went under after it lied about how an accident happened.

He’s just mad the church of shrimp Jesus is leaving him in the dust.

I agree a state monopoly on insurance would probably be beneficial but that doesn’t mean we have to get rid of different rates. Riskier drivers need to pay more because they’re more likely to take money out of the system. This doesn’t mean they have to go into a higher risk pool, it could be just one big pool but balancing money in and money out fairly will require different rates. It’s unfair to charge a person who barely drives their 10 year old car the same price as a 16 year old with a Porsche, one of those people is way more likely to have an accident, and a costly one at that, and take out more money from the pool and thus get disproportionate “benefit” for the same price.