blazespin

7 ms·

61.
by blazespin 3y ago
The difference with OpenAI / GPT is a dozen or so primary engineers plus a few billion dollars for GPUs and you have a competitive version. And if those primary engineers get sucked out of OpenAI, OpenAI won't be able to compete.
62.
by blazespin 3y ago
The staff calls the shots. The money will go wherever the talent is.
63.
by blazespin 3y ago
Yeah, the seed of this disaster was probably planted a long time ago, like when they created the hybrid, when they got money from MSFT. Maybe Ilya doesn't want to be at the forefront of AI building I guess. He probably thinks he can
64.
by blazespin 3y ago
Yeah, the message from the board hinted at something very bad. Why scare people like that? If they just said philosophical differences or something that would have been sufficient.
65.
by blazespin 3y ago
Well if you have a better business model, we're all ears. Was OpenAI just supposed to live on the good graces of MSFT? Do you know how much GPT4 costs? Plus training for GPT5? Plus supporting all those alignment efforts which just hi
66.
by blazespin 3y ago
You don't call someone a liar because you have philosophical differences.
67.
by blazespin 3y ago
"Attention is all you need" was a silly name and most people who name their stuff are poking fun at it. Obviously, attention is not all you need. Just like lucene isn't all you need.
68.
by blazespin 3y ago
Yeah, they could have had the threat of eminent domain to force a deal, but they should have gone that route instead. Saying something like "sell to us or we'll force you to via eminent domain", buying the land, and THEN com
69.
by blazespin 3y ago
Or some type of record where the farmers got into a smoky room and said 'let's all agree to jack up the price!' That said, wow, this seems like a blatantly horrible hardball tactic or probably a result of sour grapes for some
70.
by blazespin 3y ago
bullshit is anything you don't need. you've been trained to think you need it in order to keep you and everyone else busy.
71.
Exhaustive list of credible voices vouching for David Grusch and/or Claims(github.com)
15 points by blazespin 3y ago|15 comments
72.
by blazespin 3y ago
I've seen people who get promoted above their band, they are not happy campers.
73.
by blazespin 3y ago
I bet it really sucks, tbh. They did all this over promising and now the only way they can deliver is by grifting like this. That sounds really stressful to me.
74.
by blazespin 3y ago
It's a bit surprising how poorly DeepMind has lived up to their hype. But they're an OK lab, maybe a bit overly vain.
75.
by blazespin 3y ago
Yeah, this type of grifting is very proforma for Researchers. I used to stress about it, but realize it just sort of goes with the territory. It's also worth noting that the paper is blindingly obvious and everyone started doing this
76.
by blazespin 3y ago
It doesn't presuppose anything other than that some people told him aliens. I mean.. just accept it at face value. Stop reading into it.
77.
by blazespin 3y ago
It's so hilarious: "This can't be true, people would have exposed it, there's no way they could cover this up!" ... "It reads just like so many claims like we have heard in the past" I mean.... come on pe
78.
by blazespin 3y ago
It's hilarious watching how HN upvotes insane theory instead of crazy theory. Wild times! There is a very very simple explanation, which is that everything he says is true. There is a secret program, they did reverse engineer, they d
79.
by blazespin 3y ago
Good newsnation coverage as well with Mick West - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDqfGkifPEA Mick West suggests it's possible that people involved in recovering crashing satellites and reverse engineering may have let
80.
Metabunk Coverage of UFO Whistleblower(metabunk.org)
3 points by blazespin 3y ago|1 comments
81.
by blazespin 3y ago
So basically, your rebuttal is that it's not this crazy thing, it's this other very crazy thing. Ok...
82.
by blazespin 3y ago
Look, I'm as skeptical as anyone, but please watch your rebuttal. When has there ever been a senior official with a significant reputation coming out like this? That in itself is 'extraordinary' evidence. Is this proof that l
83.
by blazespin 3y ago
No, it's expert testimony. I can't believe I have to explain that on HN...
84.
by blazespin 3y ago
Well, did it remain secret? Seems like this has been openly recognized for quite awhile, but propaganda forces at play made it seems like you're a nutjob to believe it.
85.
by blazespin 3y ago
the issue with hacker news comments these days is people don't actually do any due diligence before posting. center for ai safety is 90% about present AI risks and this ai statement is just a one off thing.
86.
by blazespin 3y ago
To be fair, this paper has been made obsolete in its entirety with recent research. It's not really their fault, but folks need to start publishing faster as posters or something if they want to provide something relevant. A better ti
87.
by blazespin 3y ago
What I find rather amusing is they spend the whole paper dismissing it as ineffective yet still feel the need to worry about the 'ethics' and 'legality'. They don't cite anything with regards to a discussion/e
88.
by blazespin 3y ago
The breathtaking audacity of calling distilling GPT4 'stealing' when GPT4 trained on data it has no proprietary right to.
89.
by blazespin 3y ago
uhm, it sends your hostname, detailed OS information, and by default, your publicly routable ip address (on the packet). That's pretty malicious. I don't think the title was deceptive.
90.
by blazespin 3y ago
Exactly, that's the trillion (quadrillion?) dollar question. Have we hit asymptotic reasoning capability or not? There are interesting things to do with synthetic data, so stochastic parrot might not yet be hitting asymptote.

More ›