You're right, but in the US a government providing any sort of public service is an immediate target for the right (and an unfortunately significant portion of the "left"). We insist on paying more for less rather than ever allowing a poor person to benefit in a way they don't "deserve". So public transit hardly exists or is woefully inadequate in most places.

Why aren't you responding in Old English then? Surely that would be more correct since it is closer to the origin

Why aren't you busy burning old manuscript and books, since they don't conform to your "new meaning" of words?

Hopefully Sam follows in the tradition of other transformational tech figures, like Sam Bankman-Fried and Elizabeth Holmes

That would require more honesty than they are capable of. Putting out a bunch of platitudes that you don't actually care about is easy enough and will convince the naive that really want to believe it already

This is the kind of attitude that is the reason it won't happen

I’ll take it over whatever Luddite fucking nonsense the progressives have going on right now. I’m a progressive and will fight whatever short term nonsense perspective vociferously. It’s progressive because it’s forward looking, not some regressive bullshit like we have now.

The billionaires controlling this aren't going to save us no matter how much wealth and power they gain.

Billionaires are the ones making paradigm shifting progress because they are the only ones that can afford it. I’m all for taxing billionaires but not understanding how paradigm shifts have worked in the US for 80 years you’re just going on gut feel not evidence.

History started well before 4 years ago

Yeah but this AI wave has nothing to do how we came to AI winter in the 70s or 80s.

The necessary amount of Compute, interconnect (internet), money, researcher etc. wasn't available at that time.

and we did not invest the most amount of money and compute and brain power as we are doing right now. This is unseen.

Ah, the youth...

"The new economy" also didn't have anything to do with the previous one. Turns out that it crashed just as well.

I'm not an economist but at least as an european person, I currently do see a huge restructuring going on. A shift away from the USA to China. But I never voiced an opinion about that.

I do follow ML/AI/AGI though for a decade by now and read a lot about Neuronal networks, LLMs, etc. in a broad spectrum.

My prediction regarding Crypto/blockchain was true too.

We will see how it plays out. I'm open for both, but I think it would be naive to ignore whats going on and its way to soon to assume there is a AI winter coming soon.

We sitll want to see what Mythos can do and a distilled version of it.

Which is why they are desperate to IPO

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the model is doing. It's not your fault though, you're buying into the advertising of how it works

> In fact, most of the time models fail to demonstrate introspection—they’re either unaware of their internal states or unable to report on them coherently.

You got the wrong takeaway from your link.

The parent said: "I argue that the model has no access to its thoughts at the time."

This is falsified by that study, showing that on the frontier models generalized introspection does exist. It isn't consistent, but is is provable.

"no access" vs. "limited access"

There is no way for a user to know whether the LLM has introspection in a given case or not, and given that the answer is almost always no it is much better for everyone to assume that they do not have introspection.

You cannot trust that the model has introspection so for all intents and purposes for the end user it doesn't.

I would say "limited and unreliable access". What it says is the cause might be the cause, but it's not on any way certain.

Why are you employable if the AI does everything for you?

Mostly to do the work that AI can't do just yet. I've got the feeling that, by the time AI can do those jobs, we'll be mired in bigger issues.