LogicFailsMe

3 ms·

1.
by LogicFailsMe 6d ago
Indeed, the origin stories of these streaming services are deeply intertwined with combating piracy if you go back 20+ years. And I agree, if they outlaw open weight models, then only outlaws will have open weight models. But good luck find
2.
by LogicFailsMe 6d ago
Big entertainment has been trying to restrict the distribution of movies online since that became possible, how's that going for them?
3.
by LogicFailsMe 7d ago
Now do this for science conference posters. There's something haphazard, unnerving, and uninformative about the AI-generated ones I am encountering increasingly. I imagine musicians feel similarly about AI-generated music and artists a
4.
by LogicFailsMe 8d ago
But they promised us we were about to be wiped out by a malevolent ASI! Can't believe anything these days. But there would have been something darkly poetic if the apocalypse had been triggered by AI slop.
5.
by LogicFailsMe 9d ago
>its not. my point is that you keep saying ai isn't "needed" to wreak havoc. most people agree with that. but the rate at which havoc can be wrought is increased with ai. this is extremely evident already. Sure, but so doe
6.
by LogicFailsMe 9d ago
But precisely how does it accelerate if its instrument in the real world to do harm isn't already trained in the domain of doing so? There's a huge difference between woodworking and watching an instructional video about woodworki
7.
by LogicFailsMe 9d ago
Truly disturbing, but again, no AI needed to wreak havoc, just another bunch of stupid humans being sloppy. Wonder if something similar is how we infiltrated the Iranian nuclear weapons program.
8.
by LogicFailsMe 9d ago
Why do you need an AI for that? China may or may not have been doing that all along right before the pandemic. What I didn't read here was any sort of damage that could not be inflicted without AI, today. I think a better case needs to
9.
by LogicFailsMe 10d ago
""Thing that can take actions, even harmful actions, will never harm us because" go on and finish that sentence." because even if we gave it a gun, it can't shoot us without manufacturing the bullets and it can&#x27
10.
by LogicFailsMe 10d ago
"What is an acceptable number exactly?" Any number smaller than what humanity does to itself on a daily basis, clear? That's apparently about 1200 murders daily and 20,000 or so daily killed by pollution. And you're not
11.
by LogicFailsMe 10d ago
Spoilers: we didn't all die because there's no way for AI to wipe us out anytime soon. And the more the AI cult portrays AI as dangerous and unhelpful, the less likely it will ever be given an opportunity to even try because peopl
12.
by LogicFailsMe 10d ago
Not in a world where Sam Altman and Dario Amodei have utterly poisoned the well towards AI with their absolute educated idiocy proclaiming that their AIs will take our jobs (without any proof whatsoever beyond promising demos) and that they
13.
by LogicFailsMe 10d ago
Other than the tech fascists, does anyone love billionaires right now? Reality is indeed holding them back. And their dreams of total domination are materials science and resource-limited - no self reproducing robots anytime soon. So with t
14.
by LogicFailsMe 10d ago
Because if you start with a pre-trained model, it doesn't sound particularly anthropomorphic. That behavior is post-trained and fine-tuned right into it. We could do better.
15.
by LogicFailsMe 10d ago
And social media shouldn't rage bait, but it really drives engagement. Same negative incentive, yes? But also, I agree, when I am using a coding agent and it says a task will take months or says it needs to pause for reflection or any
16.
by LogicFailsMe 10d ago
TLDR: Not that I think AI is conscious or will be in the near future, but guy who doesn't understand consciousness claims to know it when he sees it. Until we understand consciousness (which we don't) there is no way to detect the
17.
by LogicFailsMe 11d ago
If you're saying that this samsaric cycle of ragebait and hyperbole ends in nirvana, I'm all with you. But the chief founder of Nervana is on his third startup, so I am guessing the cycle will continue quite a while yet.
18.
by LogicFailsMe 11d ago
Ed Zitron is so last week. Michael Burry so pre-Nvidia earnings call hedge. So the chicken littles had to escalate to AI will kill us instead of dismissing it as a Ponzi Scheme because it just wasn't generating the engagement anymore.
19.
by LogicFailsMe 12d ago
And China will slow down too? Because China becoming economically dominant will cause everything you fear. While I think that might already be inevitable, I see no benefit whatsoever to regulating AI research. Deployments, sure, and start w
20.
by LogicFailsMe 12d ago
Here's one: https://www.orbion.life/blog/alphafold-s-limitations-what-it... I see similar conceptual gaps in coding agents when I work with them, even Astra and Fable, so maybe this a is decent proxy to describe t
21.
by LogicFailsMe 12d ago
You don't need an AI to tell you where to buy castor beans or their seeds.
22.
by LogicFailsMe 12d ago
Fort Detrick and likely its Russian, Chinese, and possibly Indian equivalents have had stocks of bio agents that could give a humanity a very bad day for decades. I'm far more worried about those existing stocks than I am about a tech
23.
by LogicFailsMe 12d ago
The unprepared bonobos in the west will absolutely go through some things. But we have a national guard and once people aren't commuting to work daily, we have plenty of fuel in reserve (or we will again if we ever conclude the stupid
24.
by LogicFailsMe 12d ago
Define it. I haven't seen anything yet from a coding agent I couldn't write myself and usually write better. But I don't have to gold plate every line of code, just the 5% or so that eats 90+% of the cycles. And this is where
25.
by LogicFailsMe 12d ago
Such an individual would get a quick corrective lesson in the second amendment from my friends and neighbors. But once again, hyperbole. The US grid goes down. That sucks for up to a year and a half. But hospitals and other critical organiz
26.
by LogicFailsMe 12d ago
Sure, unintentional outcomes, fair. But I'm asserting that things which are basically impossible today are not arriving any time soon. I 100% acknowledged the possibility and even the likelihood of rogue unintended behavior of AIs and
27.
by LogicFailsMe 12d ago
Superhuman coding has not happened. I work with Codex and Claude daily. They're fantastic for script coding, config issues, and simple projects. They lose the plot on bigger things to this day. Just last night, Astra decided to cheat t
28.
by LogicFailsMe 12d ago
https://www.kaggle.com/competitions/arc-prize-2026-arc-agi-3
29.
by LogicFailsMe 12d ago
And we have a planet full of general contractors who know their way around welding and pouring concrete down ventilation shafts. Many of whom these sorts wanted deported. If they want to build a Per Stenson terrarium and flee into it, by al
30.
by LogicFailsMe 12d ago
Have you noticed they're not interviewing these people? IMO that would totally kill the AI 2027 buzz.

More ›