andix

7 ms·

91.
by andix 4mo ago
For the 41st car they might need to build a new parking deck. Or hire a fleet manager, because the COO can't handle it anymore. They might already run over planned capacity and every new vehicle makes it exponentially worse. For bigger
92.
by andix 4mo ago
Simple example: Pizza delivery service. The company runs very well, customers are happy, demand increases. At some point the demand gets so high, that they need to buy a second car for deliveries and a second pizza oven. They look at the nu
93.
by andix 4mo ago
They might have had delivery contracts from before the prices increased, so they didn't have to pass them to customers. Maybe the last servers from those contracts got delivered already and any new orders need to be bought at much high
94.
by andix 4mo ago
Sure, that's why I think it will start with games. You don't buy a game if you can't (properly) play it. Either you get a new gaming PC, or stop buying new games and keep playing old ones.
95.
by andix 4mo ago
> The only change I have noticed in software since LLMs have hit the mass market is degradation of software quality, not increase in feature releases. Not fully true. AI is now often used to fix a lot of bugs in old and badly maintained
96.
by andix 4mo ago
Even inside the software bubble it's debatable if there is a significant benefit on productivity (judged by total cost). But even pure software companies are hit by higher hardware prices. Their customers need to buy expensive hardware
97.
by andix 4mo ago
I think we are also going to see a lot of new software that is less hungry on compute and RAM than before. Probably first with games not requiring new hardware anymore. Because the consumers won't upgrade to new hardware as fast as bef
98.
by andix 4mo ago
I start to think that AI might be a net negative on the economy. It consumes an enormous amount of resources, just to keep doing what we did before. Laying off people also doesn't reduce cost as much as it might look like. There is a l
99.
by andix 4mo ago
It's obviously not an accurate simulation. I'm sure the creator knows it isn't. Probably the best they could come up with in limited time.
100.
by andix 4mo ago
Probably Iran used Fable to negotiate an awesome deal for them. And made the president angry. xD
101.
by andix 4mo ago
> There aren't any other choices This might be the trigger for creating other choices. Not within a month, but things can change quickly.
102.
by andix 4mo ago
When they turned into an authoritarian movement.
103.
by andix 4mo ago
This just made any closed LLM a huge supply chain risk. Everybody was aware of this possibility, but now it actually happened. It's like having nuclear weapons vs. firing a nuclear weapon. Especially outside the US customers are going
104.
by andix 4mo ago
Unique skills and jobs do exist. And LLMs can't gain additional knowledge "on the job" like humans can. They are generalists, that can only be steered by prompts, skills and context. Thats all I'm saying. This fact is cu
105.
by andix 4mo ago
They get trained before release. On general information. But they don't improve while working on very specific tasks. Every new session is like an experienced human on their first day at a new job.
106.
by andix 4mo ago
I think they were extremely scared of 4o at that point, and were scared it could trigger some horrible event. Documented cases of severe psychosis because of AI started to surface at that time. Just imagine what would've happened if a
107.
by andix 4mo ago
You didn't convince me, that I'm the tedious person to deal with here.
108.
by andix 4mo ago
Humans learn on the job. LLMs don't. Very important difference.
109.
by andix 4mo ago
Humans have a much bigger "context window". They remember many things they did an hour ago, a week ago, or even years ago.
110.
by andix 4mo ago
> but so much code writen is just the human brain doing the same autocomplete style work that LLMs can do now. That's the part they are really good at. But they are really bad at taking complex decisions. Most of them are just guess
111.
by andix 4mo ago
Because it valued human connection over factual correctness. LLMs lack the intelligence and emotions to realize when they have to stop being friendly and supportive, because it becomes unethical to continue being supportive.
112.
by andix 4mo ago
Exactly. Just look at what they are really useful right now. Running LLMs in feedback-loops (agents) so they can try out random-ish approaches until some verification function passes (tests). It's like the infinite monkeys on typewrigh
113.
by andix 4mo ago
GPT-4o was considered harmful, because it imitated human connection too much, not because it was so "smart" or capable. It was for sure a deliberate decision to make LLMs seem less like a human companion and more like an obedient
114.
by andix 4mo ago
I've stopped using cc a while ago, because it always comes up with new surprises like that.
115.
by andix 4mo ago
Apple can only allows EU-based alternatives. Then the data protection is solely in hands of the EU commission and their vetting and regulation. Problem solved. Next question?
116.
by andix 4mo ago
It is multiple things at once. It's a typical antitrust law, to increase competition. Enough competition usually leads to lower prices and lower margins. One thing it isn't for sure: "a crusade".
117.
by andix 4mo ago
Lol, no. Tesla might have "great sales", but other manufacturers grow faster. edit: here are some stats https://eu-evs.com/marketShare/ALL/Groups/Bar
118.
by andix 4mo ago
I can't find the problematic statement. Off course the tariffs are a threat to the financial success of German car manufacturers, and they need to keep their investors updated. The DMA is also threatening Apple's high profit margi
119.
by andix 4mo ago
Such political statements never damage the brand for every citizen, but for some. Tesla is a good example. Elon Musk became political and anti-EU, which resulted in an irreparable damage of the Tesla brand in Europe. Not for everyone, but a
120.
by andix 4mo ago
Exactly. Apple is playing a dangerous game here, they damage their brand for many pro-Europeans.

More ›