reasonableklout

3 ms·

31.
by reasonableklout 14d ago
But what does the human researcher do in this future? If they are not needed to understand the result, then what's their role? Asking the right questions? But how will they know what questions to ask if they don't have a deep unde
32.
by reasonableklout 14d ago
> what's going to happen, which is data centers all being located in red states that aren't going to regulate them at all The data center backlash is bipartisan though? Even Texas froze all data center buildouts recently [1]. [
33.
by reasonableklout 14d ago
OpenAI is currently under investigation by a coalition of state attorney generals: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/13/technology/states-investi... A state coalition extracted $17B from Meta earlier this
34.
by reasonableklout 15d ago
Tao’s key point is that the way people are using AI today does disrupt that. Because people and companies are valuing the results over understanding. So we’re getting slop results rushed out that are automatically verified. Moreover in t
35.
Culture Becomes a Dark Forest(theintrinsicperspective.com)
4 points by reasonableklout 15d ago|0 comments
36.
by reasonableklout 15d ago
Wait, how does their intuition about AI desires (point 6) and the HuggingFace incident (point 7) have anything to do with why they think there's been only incremental progress from GPT-2 to GPT-5? If anything it just feels like they do
37.
by reasonableklout 15d ago
Can't both be true? 1. Systems that OpenAI is able to use (either public or private) are improving rapidly at open problems, even if they are still extraordinarily expensive 2. Researchers will inadvertently speed up the rate at which
38.
Senator Hawley opens investigation into OpenAI HuggingFace hack(hawley.senate.gov)
3 points by reasonableklout 15d ago|0 comments
39.
by reasonableklout 15d ago
It's a nice article, but are there any promising approaches to "accelerate transhumanism"? Is Neuralink making any progress?
40.
by reasonableklout 16d ago
Aaronson’s thesis is all about how “explicit” self reference might not be needed: > But the idea that you’d need explicit self-referentiality before you could get convincing and world-changing conversational intelligence? Let it be burie
41.
Picking at the Corpses of Giants(randomnumbers.substack.com)
1 points by reasonableklout 17d ago|0 comments
42.
by reasonableklout 17d ago
Are you American? Contact your congressman. Or if your state is part of the coalition of state AGs investigating OpenAI, contact their office.
43.
by reasonableklout 17d ago
I don't understand how you can make this claim while working in software engineering and seeing how our field has utterly transformed over the last year, then the unrelenting march of astonishing breakthroughs and incidents this summer
44.
by reasonableklout 17d ago
I'm utterly unconvinced. Others who are moved don't have to leave to effect change. And there's a very small pool of people on the planet who are at least as qualified as Jacob to work on pretraining at Anthropic. And when th
45.
by reasonableklout 17d ago
This is also a ridiculous statement on its face. Claude outsmarts me nearly every day. I'm more like the seeing eye dog for it nowadays for the few tasks it doesn't have good perception on than a tech lead or pair programmer.
46.
by reasonableklout 17d ago
Really? I've seen much more discourse around job displacement, "permanent underclass", loss of meaning, and cyber attacks, at least until recently with the HuggingFace stuff. The problem is that all the former can still happe
47.
by reasonableklout 17d ago
But organizations are made of humans. Jacob leaving might've moved some of his coworkers and his counterparts at OpenAI. And the same can be said for those who would fill positions at the frontier. Then finally there is a political com
48.
by reasonableklout 17d ago
You're right that the case is not so clear cut since both sides were using LLMs. And yet it's still being seen as a major confrontation between the mathematical community and the AI industry because Buckmaster is a prominent membe
49.
by reasonableklout 17d ago
It's nice to see this sentiment from Noam but now I'm confused at why he seemingly mocked Sholto's earlier message: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49607090
50.
by reasonableklout 18d ago
Yep. The most uncharitable view of this might be: they stole the work of researchers to build their models, and now they're using said models to steal the proceeds of future work, too.
51.
by reasonableklout 18d ago
Do you see any way to avoid AI feudalism? Either political or technical. For example, maybe there is sustained demand and development of local models enough for individuals to retain some leverage, economic or otherwise. Perhaps mass moveme
52.
by reasonableklout 18d ago
Perhaps monetary prizes would help? "Doe & Smith explanation of Erdos #423 solution wins $10,000 prize" would certainly attract attention.
53.
by reasonableklout 18d ago
What's your base case for what comes out on the other side?
54.
by reasonableklout 18d ago
Interesting, do you have examples of the latter? The industrial revolution feels like an imperfect analogy because industrial automation still required human labor to operate the machines. The premise of this paper is a regime where machine
55.
by reasonableklout 18d ago
Timothy Gowers wrote some thoughts about how in order to do this effectively, we will need to preserve mathematical culture, which means changing some values of current academic mathematics: https://gowers.wordpress.com/2026
56.
by reasonableklout 19d ago
It’s a noble goal to change the incentives, but how will you prevent the headlines from this event being “students prove Collatz conjecture with Claude” and instead be “students give great explanation of Collatz conjecture proof”?
57.
by reasonableklout 19d ago
The actors here are states or corporations embedded in societies that risk growing popular backlash against the technology. The other factor is that if it is truly an "alien mind", racing incurs risks to all players. In game-theor
58.
by reasonableklout 19d ago
Huh? The wiki incident was discovered by independent investigators. OpenAI tried to cover it up and disputed the account from Reuters. And the reason it is receiving so much attention is because not only is the technology being developed be
59.
AI Chip Regulation Is Not a Dystopian Surveillance State(astralcodexten.com)
2 points by reasonableklout 20d ago|0 comments
60.
by reasonableklout 20d ago
You should perhaps audit posts in the last year, and see if there were any coordination threads from swarms.

More ›