generativeai
Attn Accenture employees! If you need to convert PDFs to PowerPoint slide decks, have a look at my handy online guide! It's free---no token burn!---easy, and fast: https://bucci.onl/notes/Converting-revealjs-slides-to-PowerPoint
This regards: https://mastodon.social/users/404mediaco/statuses/116805236234236215
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLMs #PowerPoint #PDF #Accenture
This regards: https://mastodon.social/users/404mediaco/statuses/116805236234236215
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLMs #PowerPoint #PDF #Accenture
If I'm honest, I do not think there is a nuanced position to take about current-generation LLM-based AI.
It is a sad technology emerging from a sad field of study initiated by sad men in a sad place sat atop a sad hill in New Hampshire. The technology generates sadness. It is soaked through with sadness. So many who use it feel sadness when they do. So many feel sadness when they watch others use it.
LLMs are like the sadness a child would feel if you showed them a beautiful cake and told them it was a real cake and they could have the whole thing, but it turned out to be styrofoam. Nathanael West once wrote that Hollywood is where the American Dream goes to die. LLMs are that sadness delivered to your bedroom (*). LLMs are DoorDash bringing you the styrofoam cake over and over forever while you hope it'll be a real cake each time.
It's OK to be sad. We all are from time to time. But what nuance is there in telling yourself the sadness is something else? Humans have been doing that forever. If there is nuance I think it lies in mourning what the existence of this technology is telling us needs mourning.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLMs #LLM
(*) I assert that reading Nathanael West's oeuvre over and over is better for you than using LLMs.
It is a sad technology emerging from a sad field of study initiated by sad men in a sad place sat atop a sad hill in New Hampshire. The technology generates sadness. It is soaked through with sadness. So many who use it feel sadness when they do. So many feel sadness when they watch others use it.
LLMs are like the sadness a child would feel if you showed them a beautiful cake and told them it was a real cake and they could have the whole thing, but it turned out to be styrofoam. Nathanael West once wrote that Hollywood is where the American Dream goes to die. LLMs are that sadness delivered to your bedroom (*). LLMs are DoorDash bringing you the styrofoam cake over and over forever while you hope it'll be a real cake each time.
It's OK to be sad. We all are from time to time. But what nuance is there in telling yourself the sadness is something else? Humans have been doing that forever. If there is nuance I think it lies in mourning what the existence of this technology is telling us needs mourning.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLMs #LLM
(*) I assert that reading Nathanael West's oeuvre over and over is better for you than using LLMs.
To be clear about this: https://zeroes.ca/users/kimcrawley/statuses/116810584288856219
I like Kim and her work on StopGenAI well enough, but this post of hers is unwarranted and unfair in my view, as is the fact that several people chose to block me in response.
If you read the full context, which I link below, you'll see the objection boils down to the fact that I used the word "current" in a critique of LLM-based generative AI systems, in an attempt to be precise about what I was saying. Obviously people should block whomever they want for whatever reason they want, but I am not going to be cajoled by threats and ultimatums like this one into making sweeping claims just because other people want to see that. I've been crystal clear about my critique of generative AI for over 3 years now and my writing on it here stands for itself. I have no record of it but people who know me know that I was also quite critical of the hype around GANs in the late 2010s.
For context, here's my post: https://buc.ci/abucci/p/1782335950.858712
and here's Kim's objection: https://zeroes.ca/@kimcrawley/116807184909806502
which reads:
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLM #tech #dev
I like Kim and her work on StopGenAI well enough, but this post of hers is unwarranted and unfair in my view, as is the fact that several people chose to block me in response.
If you read the full context, which I link below, you'll see the objection boils down to the fact that I used the word "current" in a critique of LLM-based generative AI systems, in an attempt to be precise about what I was saying. Obviously people should block whomever they want for whatever reason they want, but I am not going to be cajoled by threats and ultimatums like this one into making sweeping claims just because other people want to see that. I've been crystal clear about my critique of generative AI for over 3 years now and my writing on it here stands for itself. I have no record of it but people who know me know that I was also quite critical of the hype around GANs in the late 2010s.
For context, here's my post: https://buc.ci/abucci/p/1782335950.858712
and here's Kim's objection: https://zeroes.ca/@kimcrawley/116807184909806502
which reads:
If it weren't for your "current" modifier, your comment would be great.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLM #tech #dev
Edited 78d ago
This is a bit niche, but today I noticed the "Local REST API" plugin for Obsidian is now the "Local REST API with MCP" plugin. MCP, short for Model Context Protocol, is an LLM coding agent thing. "Local REST API" previously served a REST endpoint that let other apps, notably browser plugins, interact with your Obsidian vault. It's useful: for instance, there's a browser plugin that allows you to download a copy of any web page and stash it in your vault using the REST API this plugin serves.
I created an issue on the plugin's GitHub about removing the MCP functionality into a separate plugin, and the maintainer immediately converted it into a discussion, which is here: https://github.com/coddingtonbear/obsidian-local-rest-api/discussions/272
I'm getting the impression from all the LLM-related discussions and commits that this is a lost cause and I'll probably have to fork this plugin if I want an MCP-free version of it. Looks like they took up slop coding earlier this year too, which is another area of concern.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #AgenticAI #LLM #Claude #Copilot #AIPoisoned #NoAI #Obsidian #MCP #REST #API
I created an issue on the plugin's GitHub about removing the MCP functionality into a separate plugin, and the maintainer immediately converted it into a discussion, which is here: https://github.com/coddingtonbear/obsidian-local-rest-api/discussions/272
I'm getting the impression from all the LLM-related discussions and commits that this is a lost cause and I'll probably have to fork this plugin if I want an MCP-free version of it. Looks like they took up slop coding earlier this year too, which is another area of concern.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #AgenticAI #LLM #Claude #Copilot #AIPoisoned #NoAI #Obsidian #MCP #REST #API
Edited 99d ago
Data centers are becoming an incredibly contentious issue — and many communities are fighting back.
On #TechWontSaveUs, I spoke with Saul Levin to learn more about the pushback and moratoriums being won across the United States.
Listen to the full episode: https://techwontsave.us/episode/334_data_center_opposition_is_uniting_communities_w_saul_levin
This rsync thing has me thinking about the difference between the "free as in beer" model of free software and the "free as in freedom" model the FSF originally put forward. There are important differences, and it's meaningful when a project changes from one model to the other, which is one way to narrativize what's happened to rsync.
I think "free as in beer" software is more appropriately called "Libertarian and Open Source Software", or LOSS. Among other things it involves no obligations on other people, and expects no obligations in return (*). But this means it's an everyone for themselves, anti-communitarian endeavor. We should be honest about this. We should also be honest when a project changes state from FOSS to LOSS, because that's a meaningful change, and actually is a loss in my view.
I continue to believe that enthusiastic embrace of AI/LLM coding tools is a leading indicator of an impending FOSS→LOSS transition.
It seems to me at least one driver of the uproar over rsync is that a bunch of people thought it was a FOSS project but it had, in a short period of time, converted into a LOSS project and the shock was jolting (understandably). As a FOSS project, rsync served a community function, leading people to depend on it, make assumptions about its longer-term stability, and so on. Those are reasonable expectations of a communitarian project. As a LOSS project, rsync is under no obligations to anyone and the maintainer(s) can change the software at any time, for any reason, at their discretion alone. It seems rsync is a LOSS.
#tech #dev #software #SoftwareDevelopment #FOSS #freedom #rsync #AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLMs
(*) Putting aside whether this principle is consistently applied or hypocritical.
I think "free as in beer" software is more appropriately called "Libertarian and Open Source Software", or LOSS. Among other things it involves no obligations on other people, and expects no obligations in return (*). But this means it's an everyone for themselves, anti-communitarian endeavor. We should be honest about this. We should also be honest when a project changes state from FOSS to LOSS, because that's a meaningful change, and actually is a loss in my view.
I continue to believe that enthusiastic embrace of AI/LLM coding tools is a leading indicator of an impending FOSS→LOSS transition.
It seems to me at least one driver of the uproar over rsync is that a bunch of people thought it was a FOSS project but it had, in a short period of time, converted into a LOSS project and the shock was jolting (understandably). As a FOSS project, rsync served a community function, leading people to depend on it, make assumptions about its longer-term stability, and so on. Those are reasonable expectations of a communitarian project. As a LOSS project, rsync is under no obligations to anyone and the maintainer(s) can change the software at any time, for any reason, at their discretion alone. It seems rsync is a LOSS.
#tech #dev #software #SoftwareDevelopment #FOSS #freedom #rsync #AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLMs
(*) Putting aside whether this principle is consistently applied or hypocritical.
I found this to be excellent: https://mass-driver.com/article/from-human-hands
From human hands.
We don’t use AI in any of our design or production processes. Here’s why.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #ImageGeneration #fonts #typefaces #art
From human hands.
We don’t use AI in any of our design or production processes. Here’s why.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #ImageGeneration #fonts #typefaces #art
Something notable about this case is that Google essentially argued that everyone knows Google's AI overviews are untrustworthy, and it's on them if they believe any of it. Coupled with Microsoft's assertion that Microsoft Copilot is for entertainment purposes only, one really has to wonder how seriously the companies pushing AI take their own technology.
From the linked article: "The Oumi analysis also found that 56 percent of the correct Gemini 3 answers couldn't be backed up by the sources Google linked. The AI is giving answers whose origins users can't trace." This technology is not fit for purpose.
Frankly, given how much is at stake, I find it unacceptable that multi-trillion-dollar corporations are playing word games with the legal system. They should release their products on Steam and XBOX if they're for entertainment only and get them out of search engines and office suites, tools people use to do real work every day.
Landmark German ruling declares Google's AI Overviews are Google's own words and makes it liable for false answers: https://the-decoder.com/landmark-german-ruling-declares-googles-ai-overviews-are-googles-own-words-and-makes-it-liable-for-false-answers/
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLM #Google #GoogleGemini #Gemini #AIOverviews
From the linked article: "The Oumi analysis also found that 56 percent of the correct Gemini 3 answers couldn't be backed up by the sources Google linked. The AI is giving answers whose origins users can't trace." This technology is not fit for purpose.
Frankly, given how much is at stake, I find it unacceptable that multi-trillion-dollar corporations are playing word games with the legal system. They should release their products on Steam and XBOX if they're for entertainment only and get them out of search engines and office suites, tools people use to do real work every day.
Landmark German ruling declares Google's AI Overviews are Google's own words and makes it liable for false answers: https://the-decoder.com/landmark-german-ruling-declares-googles-ai-overviews-are-googles-own-words-and-makes-it-liable-for-false-answers/
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLM #Google #GoogleGemini #Gemini #AIOverviews
I guess you have to go to the likes of Harvard to be spared bad AI takes by poor thinkers at commencement 🙄
Ronny Chieng Tells Harvard to ‘Destroy AI’ as Graduates Cheer
Ronny Chieng Tells Harvard to ‘Destroy AI’ as Graduates Cheer
The comedian and The Daily Show host gave the keynote address for Class Day 2026.
OK let's try this:
"The belief in the indispensability of LLMs is not entirely mistaken. LLMs become an indispensable component of any structure once they are so thoroughly integrated with the structure, so enmeshed in various vital substructures, that they can no longer be factored out without fatally impairing the whole structure. That is virtually a tautology. The utility of this tautology is that it can reawaken us to the possibility that some human actions, e.g., the introduction of LLMs into some complex human activities, may constitute an irreversible commitment."
Riffing on https://merveilles.town/users/mccd/statuses/116725032393633581
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #AgenticAI #LLMs #Weizenbaum
"The belief in the indispensability of LLMs is not entirely mistaken. LLMs become an indispensable component of any structure once they are so thoroughly integrated with the structure, so enmeshed in various vital substructures, that they can no longer be factored out without fatally impairing the whole structure. That is virtually a tautology. The utility of this tautology is that it can reawaken us to the possibility that some human actions, e.g., the introduction of LLMs into some complex human activities, may constitute an irreversible commitment."
Riffing on https://merveilles.town/users/mccd/statuses/116725032393633581
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #AgenticAI #LLMs #Weizenbaum
ACM will no longer require disclosure of the use of #generativeAI in writing papers.... an absolutely terrible change by the @ACM Publications Board to the Policy on Authorship.
Yes, this will give ACM more papers. No, the ideology of "number go up" productivism is not the path to responsible, ecological or ethical computing, but to irrelevance. #AIslop
Sad to hear that the Haskell ecosystem is going slop, which I learned from https://git-annex.branchable.com/no_llm_code/
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLM #NoAI #Haskell #ghc
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLM #NoAI #Haskell #ghc
Please stop saying LLMs "think". They do not. They just pull from the training set things somebody else thought. When the LLM writes something that looks thoughtful, you must know it was just copied (and very likely stolen) from the work of somebody else.
#GenerativeAI
The proliferation of AI tools in science risks introducing a phase of scientific enquiry in which we produce more but understand less.
There are good points in this article, but the framing of the risk above is broken, to my way of thinking. In adopting the economic metaphor of production, it's taking for granted that there is a scientific process that leads to products, and that we can quantify how many of these products are produced. "We produce more".
I would argue that if we do not understand whatever is coming out of this process, then they are not products in any reasonable sense of that word. In fact I'd say this of any putative commodity: if a factory spits out a widget nobody knows how to use, then the factory has not produced a commodity, it has made an object. Commodities are commodious, adapted to a use or purpose, and human beings are the entities that have uses and purposes.
So, if we create machines that make knowledge-objects resembling the products of science that fewer and fewer people understand, we are not engaging in "scientific enquiry" or "knowledge production". In this view the phrase quoted above ought to be re-cast as "The proliferation of AI tools in science risks science". What exactly is enquiry for if not understanding more?
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLM #science
Edited 62d ago
Re: https://infosec.exchange/users/lcamtuf/statuses/116901998490591428
There's an emerging theme in my last few posts today concerning means vs. ends. Science as a production process that spits out knowledge products. Writing as the necessary chore sitting between a person and "having another blog post" or "citation count go up".
Overfocus on the ends can lead one to think of the means as chores. Science is slow and boring, let's use AI to spit out the Good Science Stuff faster. Writing is a chore, let's use the AI to spit out Documents. Heck let's chain them together and have the machine do Good Science Stuff and then spit out Documents about it that we feed back into the machine and hey we can send the Documents to Funding Agencies to get Funding for our Good Science Stuff and spit out even more Documents so that...and...to...so...[infinite random string]. Wait what were we doing again?
Personally I think it's poisonous to focus mostly on ends. The absurdity is a clue. If I believed in souls I'd say it's bad for them. I guess I find the mindset confusing because long ago I came to think that the means are the ends. There are no other ends but the means.
Yes, I well understand there are certain kinds of mandated writing that are tedious and unwanted.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLMs #writing
I don't find it surprising that people send LLM-generated docs, publish LLM-generated blog posts, etc. Writing is a chore and there's this big button labeled "get it done".
There's an emerging theme in my last few posts today concerning means vs. ends. Science as a production process that spits out knowledge products. Writing as the necessary chore sitting between a person and "having another blog post" or "citation count go up".
Overfocus on the ends can lead one to think of the means as chores. Science is slow and boring, let's use AI to spit out the Good Science Stuff faster. Writing is a chore, let's use the AI to spit out Documents. Heck let's chain them together and have the machine do Good Science Stuff and then spit out Documents about it that we feed back into the machine and hey we can send the Documents to Funding Agencies to get Funding for our Good Science Stuff and spit out even more Documents so that...and...to...so...[infinite random string]. Wait what were we doing again?
Personally I think it's poisonous to focus mostly on ends. The absurdity is a clue. If I believed in souls I'd say it's bad for them. I guess I find the mindset confusing because long ago I came to think that the means are the ends. There are no other ends but the means.
Yes, I well understand there are certain kinds of mandated writing that are tedious and unwanted.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLMs #writing
Edited 62d ago
Nobody who noticed DeepSeek and is able to reason is surprised by this.
Chinese AI model takes US tech industry by surprise with abilities rivaling Claude and ChatGPT
https://apnews.com/article/kimi-k3-china-ai-0d8a5e268deb11a673f4d444fc597cc5
See the attached chart for trend. It plots weekly token usage by US firms.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLM #Claude #ChatGPT #DeepSeek #China #US
Chinese AI model takes US tech industry by surprise with abilities rivaling Claude and ChatGPT
https://apnews.com/article/kimi-k3-china-ai-0d8a5e268deb11a673f4d444fc597cc5
See the attached chart for trend. It plots weekly token usage by US firms.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLM #Claude #ChatGPT #DeepSeek #China #US
I was ranting to my wife and said "AI is like if Kia announced they'd invented a flying car and then showed off an ordinary car with a little fan mounted underneath that blew a puff of air at the ground", and she encouraged me to share. Please enjoy.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLMs #Claude #Codex #Anthropic #OpenAI #FlyingCars
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLMs #Claude #Codex #Anthropic #OpenAI #FlyingCars
Regarding the LB, https://fedi.kbg.sh/users/kevin/statuses/117085582358711627
There's an interesting thing about strongly typed programming languages, especially dependently typed ones (1), wherein if you know the type signature of a function there is sometimes only one implementation of it, and that implementation will have lots of nice properties (e.g. Philip Wadler's Theorems for free! paper, also Jose Oliveira's work, and the followups to these). It's a fascinating set of results that holds out the possibility of at least some amount of automatic programming that has desirable, provable properties concerning correctness, resource use, security, and so on.
However, that "some amount" is very important to remember. I'd argue that no matter how far such work is pushed, there will always be an infinite space of things one might wish to express in software that cannot be automatically programmed in that way. That's the Therac-25 space the LB evokes. We all know this intuitively, I think, yet in the various mystifications thrown up about computers and software and now LLMs it can be hard to remember.
For example, I'd say so-called "side effects" or just "effects" are still a large blind spot of these methods. Without effects functional programming does little more than heat up a CPU (but the heat is an effect oops), so if we're being snarky we might say functional programming without effects isn't programming at all. But in spite of the gazillion attempts to do so, you really cannot faithfully capture all side effects of interest in a type system, for the simple reason that the real world is open-ended.(2) There's a funny contradiction that functional programming languages could not exist were it not for irreducibly effectful computational architectures to exist on. Asking the CPU to execute an instruction, and all the statefulness this necessarily involves, is a "side effect" in this view of computation, which is absurd.
For these reasons I've found it fruitful to conceive of functional programming as an intricate bureaucracy sitting between the programmer and the real world.(3) Set up enough bureaucracy and you can comfortably pretend most of the real world isn't there most of the time. Some people do this for so long that they begin to think the bureaucracy is the real world (4); or they try to warp the real world till it becomes more and more like the bureaucracy.(5) But the real world is oozy and eventually squishes around all attempts to constrain it in this way. Neglecting this is how people end up being harmed by digital technology.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLMs #Lean #math #ComputerScience #theory #FunctionalProgramming #philosophy
(1) "leanslop" in the linked post refers to Lean, a dependently typed functional programming language that's being used to formalize mathematical ideas. We should always remember that Lean originated from Microsoft Research
(2) There's a long history of philosophical arguments hiding behind that assertion but there's no space to get into that here. A less contentious way to put it would be that the claim that all side effects worth caring about can be captured in a type system is a philosophical commitment, not a fact about the world, and therefore it's possible it cannot be done
(3) We use terms like runtimes, preludes, standard libraries, or APIs/ABIs (among others) for this bureaucracy
(4) "Touch grass"
(5) Financialization and neoliberalism, e.g.
There's an interesting thing about strongly typed programming languages, especially dependently typed ones (1), wherein if you know the type signature of a function there is sometimes only one implementation of it, and that implementation will have lots of nice properties (e.g. Philip Wadler's Theorems for free! paper, also Jose Oliveira's work, and the followups to these). It's a fascinating set of results that holds out the possibility of at least some amount of automatic programming that has desirable, provable properties concerning correctness, resource use, security, and so on.
However, that "some amount" is very important to remember. I'd argue that no matter how far such work is pushed, there will always be an infinite space of things one might wish to express in software that cannot be automatically programmed in that way. That's the Therac-25 space the LB evokes. We all know this intuitively, I think, yet in the various mystifications thrown up about computers and software and now LLMs it can be hard to remember.
For example, I'd say so-called "side effects" or just "effects" are still a large blind spot of these methods. Without effects functional programming does little more than heat up a CPU (but the heat is an effect oops), so if we're being snarky we might say functional programming without effects isn't programming at all. But in spite of the gazillion attempts to do so, you really cannot faithfully capture all side effects of interest in a type system, for the simple reason that the real world is open-ended.(2) There's a funny contradiction that functional programming languages could not exist were it not for irreducibly effectful computational architectures to exist on. Asking the CPU to execute an instruction, and all the statefulness this necessarily involves, is a "side effect" in this view of computation, which is absurd.
For these reasons I've found it fruitful to conceive of functional programming as an intricate bureaucracy sitting between the programmer and the real world.(3) Set up enough bureaucracy and you can comfortably pretend most of the real world isn't there most of the time. Some people do this for so long that they begin to think the bureaucracy is the real world (4); or they try to warp the real world till it becomes more and more like the bureaucracy.(5) But the real world is oozy and eventually squishes around all attempts to constrain it in this way. Neglecting this is how people end up being harmed by digital technology.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLMs #Lean #math #ComputerScience #theory #FunctionalProgramming #philosophy
(1) "leanslop" in the linked post refers to Lean, a dependently typed functional programming language that's being used to formalize mathematical ideas. We should always remember that Lean originated from Microsoft Research
(2) There's a long history of philosophical arguments hiding behind that assertion but there's no space to get into that here. A less contentious way to put it would be that the claim that all side effects worth caring about can be captured in a type system is a philosophical commitment, not a fact about the world, and therefore it's possible it cannot be done
(3) We use terms like runtimes, preludes, standard libraries, or APIs/ABIs (among others) for this bureaucracy
(4) "Touch grass"
(5) Financialization and neoliberalism, e.g.
Edited 29d ago
Regarding this: https://social.vivaldi.net/users/lproven/statuses/117087977477686112
Putting aside "The Point Prover Has Entered The Chat" aspect of this response, if we are serious about whether or not people can fluently differentiate LLM text from human-written text, we're not going to understand how or whether we can do it if our basis is a series of KPIs like # of languages we speak, education level we've attained, this or that credential, and so on.(1) None of those things confer reading comprehension by themselves, and the mindset that leads one to conflate them with demonstrated ability is literally the problem. "I know 6 languages, and I'm not able to tell the difference between LLM-generated text and human-written text" is, if anything, a self own. I read it as a limitation of self awareness, not a demonstration of fact.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLM #reading #text #interpretation
(1) If you haven't yet met a person with a PhD in English who lacks basic reading comprehension, I recommend it as a one-time life experience.
Putting aside "The Point Prover Has Entered The Chat" aspect of this response, if we are serious about whether or not people can fluently differentiate LLM text from human-written text, we're not going to understand how or whether we can do it if our basis is a series of KPIs like # of languages we speak, education level we've attained, this or that credential, and so on.(1) None of those things confer reading comprehension by themselves, and the mindset that leads one to conflate them with demonstrated ability is literally the problem. "I know 6 languages, and I'm not able to tell the difference between LLM-generated text and human-written text" is, if anything, a self own. I read it as a limitation of self awareness, not a demonstration of fact.
#AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLM #reading #text #interpretation
(1) If you haven't yet met a person with a PhD in English who lacks basic reading comprehension, I recommend it as a one-time life experience.
I'm thrilled to share that my new book #HYPERSCALE is hitting bookstores on October 20. You can preorder it now!
It's an account of how the data center boom is pushing our planet past its breaking point, and of the incredible efforts of people and movements pushing back against the profit-driven interests of Big Tech.
Get your copy and learn more: https://hyperscalebook.com/
#techindustry #techbook #newbook #reading #datacenter #datacenters #generativeai #politics #artificialintelligence
"While Buckmaster and Alpöge were finalizing their own results, they learned that “information about our progress had been passed to OpenAI.” When they contacted OpenAI, they were told that OpenAI had already achieved a full proof of the central problem. But when they asked follow-up questions about when OpenAI had begun its research into the problem and how much human input was involved, the answers became more evasive.
“It emerged that an entire team had been working on the problem,” Buckmaster said, “and that an insane amount of compute had been used…. Eventually, it was agreed that [the first prompt] had been sent in the past few days, after information about our work had reached OpenAI.”
If true, that would suggest the OpenAI team had become convinced that Buckmaster and Alpöge’s approach was the right one, and decided to use its material advantage in computing resources to reach a formal proof first."
#AI #GenerativeAI #LLMs #OpenAI #Astra #GPT #Math #Mathematics
Pro AI tip: yes, they are using all of your user data and will store and use it forever. The primary function of the apps is to collect that data and subsequently claim ownership over your thoughts and ideas.
"AGI" is not an algorithm. It is human thought and ideation decoupled from the individual and decontextualized. It is a Mechanical Turk with a long enough chain of digital intermediaries that perception of the intrinsic humanity in its operation is obscured.
#AGI #AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLM #OpenAI #Anthropic
"AGI" is not an algorithm. It is human thought and ideation decoupled from the individual and decontextualized. It is a Mechanical Turk with a long enough chain of digital intermediaries that perception of the intrinsic humanity in its operation is obscured.
#AGI #AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLM #OpenAI #Anthropic
Pro AI tip: yes, they are using all of your user data and will store and use it forever. The primary function of the apps is to collect that data and subsequently claim ownership over your thoughts and ideas.
"AGI" is not an algorithm. It is human thought and ideation decoupled from the individual and decontextualized. It is a Mechanical Turk with a long enough chain of digital intermediaries that perception of the intrinsic humanity in its operation is obscured.
#AGI #AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLM #OpenAI #Anthropic
"AGI" is not an algorithm. It is human thought and ideation decoupled from the individual and decontextualized. It is a Mechanical Turk with a long enough chain of digital intermediaries that perception of the intrinsic humanity in its operation is obscured.
#AGI #AI #GenAI #GenerativeAI #LLM #OpenAI #Anthropic