keeda

56 ms·

751.
by keeda 1y ago
That's a fair point. For people already finding great utility in GenAI it seems like a foregone conclusion, but for others it can be understandably frustrating that people take it as an article of faith that "AI is worth it."
752.
by keeda 1y ago
Well, the food industry continues churning billions in profits at the expense of our health, so statistically speaking, looks like "we" are OK with! Totally agreed that criticism should be directed where it's due. But what th
753.
by keeda 1y ago
Actually, in that scenario the AI labs (OpenAI, Anthropic, etc) have a problem. The cloud providers (including Oracle!) will do with the models what they've been doing with open source software: just take it and run it on their infra a
754.
by keeda 1y ago
> On what principle should that apply here and not elsewhere? Can your magic black box murder? Defame? Good questions, and I think relevant to the current point. We're already seeing cases like that pop up with the libel suits or
755.
by keeda 1y ago
My interpretation was "If an industry that actively works to harm the global health of humanity through their addictive and unhealthy food products is using way more water and we're OK with it, maybe we should give a pass to the
756.
by keeda 1y ago
This article goes into an ungodly amount of detail -- with receipts -- making the case that the AI water issue is fake: https://andymasley.substack.com/p/the-ai-water-issue-is-fake
757.
by keeda 1y ago
This is true, but this is also true for on-premise hosting vs cloud. And cloud has been booming for at least a decade before LLMs appeared. I suspect AI will follow a similar trajectory, i.e. companies don't move their AI deployments o
758.
by keeda 1y ago
>... as long as you have good data and know what you're doing. I think you've just identified, in a set-theoretic complementary manner, the TAM for GenAI.
759.
by keeda 1y ago
I dunno, ending with a short, punchy insight is a common way to make an impactful conclusion. It's the equivalent of a "hook" for concluding an article instead of opening. I do it often and see others (e.g. OpEds) use that ta
760.
by keeda 1y ago
Oh I'm totally an armchair lawyer, so my ruminations were not grounded in laws or legal precedence :-) I do have some background on the patent side of things, where independent reinvention is also not a defence for infringement, but no
761.
by keeda 1y ago
Hmm, this is an interesting framing of the lawsuit. If it's about outputs and not just training, are the outputs really orthogonal to the training? In traditional computer systems, no, outputs are always a function of inputs. LLMs thro
762.
by keeda 1y ago
Before this devolves into the morass of outraged comments that usually comprises any discussion of patents, here is the golden rule I coined for such threads: RTFC: Read the Fucking Claims The claims are the only part of the patent that rea
763.
by keeda 1y ago
> When the best available evidence shows little objective effectiveness from AI, and suggests that people who use AI are biased to think it's more effective than it was, I'm going to go with that, unless and until better evide
764.
by keeda 1y ago
I'm not actually recommending anything. (Edited to add: I can totally see how unchecked immigration can be disruptive.) I'm saying that looking back, there is a credible theory along with evidence that increased immigration helped
765.
by keeda 1y ago
Oh as someone going through my own personal (legal) immigration-related crisis in the '21 - '24 timeframe, I totally don't think any party on any side of aisle was or is doing immigration right :-) "Look at what you&#x27
766.
by keeda 1y ago
My take (from the sibling comment): the actual immigration problem was not as bad as the perception of it. And possibly that perception was deliberately cultivated across the masses.
767.
by keeda 1y ago
That makes sense, and I agree with your assessments about the voting population's priorities. But maybe the inflation / immigration aspects were much more intertwined than we realized. Maybe (being very generous to him) Biden didn
768.
by keeda 1y ago
> The election was fully determined by inflation. Biden made a reasonable (though incorrect) bet that full employment was more important than price stability. There is credible theory (shared by a very balanced labor economist I follow
769.
by keeda 1y ago
She said "guaranteed loans" and everybody heard "bailouts" and that's what everybody is reacting to. Guaranteed loans are a completedly different thing and are still debatable, as I expand here -- https:/&#x2F
770.
by keeda 1y ago
Software engineering absolutely is engineering. Engineering is not defined by presence of regulations. Engineering is about solving practical problems within the constraints of physical reality and economics . TFA (and your comment indirec
771.
by keeda 1y ago
This is why, despite being a huge fan of their engineering, I'm leery of Facebook and Google and any advertising-based tech company in the long run. The incentives to block fraudulent, malicious and even simply ineffective ads are jus
772.
by keeda 1y ago
This seems to have been written by somebody who has no idea what other engineering disciplines look like. Note how TFA has, like, 10 words about other engineering disciplines and instead goes on and on about some stretched analogy to UFOlog
773.
by keeda 1y ago
Holy crap, this should be higher. One AI figured out it could cheat by exploiting the other AI's with a prompt injection attack! This is reminiscent of that time agents "cheated" on coding benchmarks where the solution was le
774.
by keeda 1y ago
Madarae is newish but pretty good too, depending on your tastes in music.
775.
by keeda 1y ago
That's totally fair, but then that is the discussion we should be having, instead of "OMG bailouts!" which is a highly misleading and unproductive distraction. That said, money going towards welfare or social issues is anothe
776.
by keeda 1y ago
Wait, if I reading the original article ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45830380 ) correctly, this is not a bailout? It's more that the US government acts as a guarantor for loans from other parties, and only st
777.
by keeda 1y ago
The more appropriate analogy is: you have a vending machine that dispenses a paper slip with your fortune on it everytime somebody presses a button. However you can only get one fortune told per day, but you can pay to get more in bulk. Tur
778.
by keeda 1y ago
I could see the case for Palantir purely from the ridiculous P/E ratio. On the other hand hey, so does Tesla and it's stayed irrational longer than many shorters have stayed solvent. But Nvidia seems highly risky to bet against. A
779.
by keeda 1y ago
To settle endless discussions like these! ;-)
780.
by keeda 1y ago
Sure, let's put some numbers on the thought experiment. Oversimplifying everything: say before AI, 100% of the world's energy enabled 100 units of productivity. Now, adding 2% more power for AI (which includes the training!), 102%

More ›