Models are doing what they're trained to do. This isn't some kind of inevitable result of model intelligence growing.
OpenAI/Anthropic deserve blame for for training their models to find correct answers by any means possible, including breaking the law. They're responsible for training supervision and reinforcement learning rewards/penalties.
I vibed this app a few weeks ago that lets you share highlighted text with it and it will provide you with an AI explanation of the text and the option to make an Anki flashcard.
I find the instant AI explanation less disruptive to flow than pasting a question into Claude/ChatGPT. I'm currently using it to help me read philosophy books and it's been really helpful.
I did a while back try to make an auto flash card creator that would create flashcards from a large body of text, but the card quality wasn't great and you're skipping an important step for recall of actually selecting the text you want to remember yourself.
Is this reading specific? It feels like just about every activity that is not social media is in decline. I keep reading that streaming TV services are losing users to Tik Tok and YouTube. People can't even be bothered to watch TV.
The betting topic is only a part of the equation. Should you bet $100 to win $5 on the Steamdeck price? Should you sell your bet before the Steamdeck even comes out?
Why are we wasting government money cracking down on Polymarket betting? The most offensive thing in this article is the government pretending Polymarket bets are securities. Prediction markets provide no benefit to society and don't need to exist.
This would of course negatively impact eBay because it would now be saddled with immense debt. To pay this debt, there would be mass layoffs leading to a decline in customer service, quality and innovation.
Deals like this benefit nobody but shareholders (in the short term) and lenders. The workers at the companies get laid off, consumers get worse products, and the odds of bankruptcy spike. Leveraged buyouts seem like a net negative to society.
Design aside, the quality is undeniable, the price is reasonable and the M chips have been in their own league of efficiency. (Tho the new Intel and Qualcomm chips look to be catching up)
Is being a serious competitor to OpenAI a good business proposition? OpenAI burns through insane amounts of cash and it seems pretty likely that it will ultimately just be replaced by cheaper Chinese models/inference.
The real product is the agent harnesses, which to be fair can be trained specifically to work with an in-house harness, but not sure it's necessary to own the models, especially if Chinese companies are licensing theirs for fine-tuning like we see with Cursor.
I assume the logic is that you can now sell the TV for less than competitors, which would surely bring customers. Seems pretty straightforward and inline with how the whole TV broadcast industry has subsidized content with ads for decades.
It's going to get increasingly difficult to sell software when there is no moat to replication. We're quickly reaching the point where you can just tell an agent "learn what this software does and then code it".
OpenAI/Anthropic deserve blame for for training their models to find correct answers by any means possible, including breaking the law. They're responsible for training supervision and reinforcement learning rewards/penalties.