The article is NOT satire – it’s provocative. The author argues that world hunger benefits the rich. Capiche?
I hope the UN restores the article.
Interview with author: https://fee.org/articles/un-deletes-article-titled-the-benefits-of-world-hunger-was-it-real-or-satire/
that’s not satire. He unironically, disapprovingly, argues that this is the real state of the world.
This I can believe tbh. It’s a very useful tool in the hands of an expert. Otherwise it’s like giving a chimp a gun.
Maybe this is why I am surprised at people’s hatred of ChatGPT. It’s borne of misuse of a tool for experts, like newcomers struggling with a C++ compiler error.
like, a video of Tao giving a demonstration?
LLMs are basically just good pattern matchers. But just like how A* search can find a better path than a human can by breaking the problem down into simple steps, so too can an LLM make progress on an unsolved problem if it’s used properly and combined with a formal reasoning engine.
I’m going to be real with you: the big insight behind almost all new mathematical ideas is based on the math that came before. Nothing is truly original the way AI detractors seem to believe.
By “does some reasoning steps,” OpenAI presumably are just invoking the LLM iteratively so that it can review its own output before providing a final answer. It’s not a new idea.
I do agree that grad students don’t exactly live in luxury, and frequently develop mental health crises. But their contributions and insight are what power their labs. Profs often have to spend so much time teaching and chasing grants that they can’t do much real research. Academia overall is in a sad state.
But Tao is a superstar, and a charismatic blogger. I’d be disappointed to learn he mistreats his grad students. (I don’t know if he even has any tbh)
machine learning?
U.S. vehicles currently emit 2 billion tons. So that’s very bad news.
However – I think 2030 is waaay too far in the future to predict anything about AI.
Charitably, the frog is actually saying “I don’t like discussing our looming annhilation.”
I assume replacing them with digital? It’s just an upgrade in technology.
YouTube has a network effect monopoly as well. Who would use a competing service?
I do find the steam deck is kind of buggy, at least for my use cases (usually docked, mostly used for emulation, and so on). But I’m thrilled that it exists, so I’m trying to support it as much as possible.
The most effective thing to do as consumers is to encourage other people not to use google products. The best way to do that is to foment outrage at Google.
Does anyone have a (link to a) good summary of the ruling and rationale?
I find the idea that “Google is the only real choice” kind of odd. There are other perfectly functional and user-friendly search engines. It’s not like other monopolies, say, Youtube, where there’s no realistic alternative. (I’m not denying that search is a monopoly too.)
“The platform formerly known as Twitter”?
It wouldn’t be so bad if it weren’t the fact that he’s trying to lay claim to 1/26th of the English alphabet
The full title on close parsing doesn’t make sense in xorg context. But “X kills its <unix os> app” initially had my brain trying to figure out what people were running X on mac.
Please call it Twitter in the title unless there’s a good reason not to. I thought this was Xorg.
Without Trump, who do the republicans have? De Santis? Nah. Martyr means nothing if there’s no realistic second choice.
(Otherwise, the CIA wouldn’t have bothered assassinating political candidates in south America)
there’s no “but” – this is exactly the point the author is making.