catigula

7 ms·

91.
by catigula 3mo ago
Wow what a piece of shit.
92.
by catigula 3mo ago
Thanks; I read the story you linked. It mostly reads as a hit piece centered around various legal allegations tied to stringent confidentiality agreements. There isn't much substance beyond that. The article briefly discusses some vagu
93.
by catigula 3mo ago
His protocols are usually pretty robustly researched. The worst thing you can say about Bryan Johnson is that I personally believe he over-indexes on suspect science, but that's it.
94.
by catigula 3mo ago
Every modern workflow implicitly relies on that. No infrastructure is fully robust. There's a senior DB person who has learned many things many times over who could bring down most of the US power grid.
95.
by catigula 3mo ago
For some reason, research like this has a much more apocalyptic feeling than it has in the past.
96.
by catigula 3mo ago
There’s no optimal answer. The reality is this is world-ending technology and absolutely nobody knows what to do or can even agree that the problem exists.
97.
by catigula 3mo ago
Why do you think I haven’t looked into it? You’re not providing anything of note, so merely saying “I’ve looked into it. I’m good” seems like it’s the correct reply.
98.
by catigula 3mo ago
I hate to tell you this, but recommending cimetidine basically makes you a modern day sawbones. I’d recommended getting up to date knowledge about the options before providing advice on them, starting with safer h2 antagonists like famotidi
99.
by catigula 3mo ago
The dementia meta-analyses are a wash. It doesn’t lean strongly either way. I wouldn’t worry about it.
100.
by catigula 3mo ago
I’ve been taking high doses long term for over a decade and I don’t really have any substantial issues.
101.
by catigula 3mo ago
This sounds concerning to me.
102.
by catigula 4mo ago
They're not merely 'making something cheaper'. They're actively violating the terms of service using deceptive means. This is a trade-secret/DMCA violation. You're not allowed to use computers to do stuff like
103.
by catigula 4mo ago
Merely copying products that actual companies produce and making them cheaper is anti-competitive. There's no incentive for the products to be developed in the first place in a market if this is happening. This is why copy protections
104.
by catigula 4mo ago
>We're going to take your jobs and possibly kill you and also Jeff Bezos might get to live forever, ahahahahahaha! Is this really a mystery?
105.
by catigula 4mo ago
Chinese companies are engaging in anti-competitive practices, as usual. They are rogue actors on the economic scene. If it were feasible, they'd be widely banned, and for good reason.
106.
by catigula 4mo ago
It's a bit disappointing when people see this as a schadenfreude moment because it's clearly not safe nor a good precedent for potentially dangerous AI models to trivially fall into the hands of malicious actors.
107.
by catigula 4mo ago
No, the majority of the population is hostile to AI. This has been surveyed time and time again. I definitely disagree with your premise.
108.
by catigula 4mo ago
How does firing people resultant of the most disliked and unpopular technology on the planet, and avoiding marking it off on an obvious entry-point into regulatory burden "make them look better"?
109.
by catigula 4mo ago
Doorman? Do you live in Trump Tower?
110.
by catigula 4mo ago
We had the cops investigate themselves and they found no evidence of wrong-doing.
111.
by catigula 4mo ago
Source >I made it up. It was invented by a writer.
112.
by catigula 4mo ago
Conspiracy theory. You should be shamed for this idea. Mythos is a serious model; the NSA said it compromised them in hours. This is a marketing article.
113.
by catigula 4mo ago
What year are we in? >I am skeptical of the reasons given publicly, I suspect it’s really just so much more expensive to operate than their current models that they don’t want to offer it broadly, yet, given the difficulty they’ve had gr
114.
by catigula 4mo ago
This is a huge deal. Can we please stop doing this? It feels super dangerous now.
115.
by catigula 4mo ago
Honestly seems kind of pointless in an era of cloud gaming :)
116.
by catigula 4mo ago
A classifier that was exposed as non-efficacious for a product touted as having extremely dangerous capabilities. I can generate hacks trivially by asking any model to fix open source code. Let’s not pretend you get to have your cake and ea
117.
by catigula 4mo ago
Sorry, this argument doesn't work. Anthropic claims Mythos is in a class of its own, the evidence corroborates this and the government believes it. The government shot your pit bull because you were going around telling everyone who wo
118.
by catigula 4mo ago
>Nicholas Carlini recently rang the alarm about the dangers of AI—and now he’s part of a team arguing for the latest models to be released Classic Anthropic.
119.
by catigula 4mo ago
Which American model did they distill this one from?
120.
by catigula 4mo ago
They did a whole PR cycle about how dangerous their technology was. They refused to release it for public consumption. How is this “targeting”? It’s literally what was requested.

More ›