Honest question, is it possible that since might be using the latest/best model to analyze and improve the existing ones, the moat will expand exponentially, making the models better and more efficient at each iteration until there is no point in competing?
I also was having a similar thought, and think you wrote the answer I could not put my finger on.
Compilers are deterministic, AI is a stochastic process, it doesn't always converge exactly to the same answer. Here's the main difference
Me too, I printed it and underlined it, I will try to memorize some of the concepts and the exposition, because this is a cristallization of what I vaguely feel about the abuse of LLM I am currently witnessing
That is very true, although I also have the opposite example: some math books at Uni (e.g. the recommended one for calculus) were so dense with information that I could not make head and tails
I often had to buy a second book where the content was... well digestible
Well... hold your horses, when you make solar panel self replicating and self-healing nano-machines that span all over the planet you would have beaten nature.
So far we have beaten nature on the aspect of sheer efficiency
It's not really clear to me what's your position. In the sense you state that you find it appalling, but what? The fact that there is a problem with such generative AI, the discussion that might follow, or its consequences.
Obviously the powers that be will try to use this at their advantage, trying to tighten a bit control over population, such as rendering AI models illegal, except a selected blessed few (read megacorp. ones)
IMO the general response shouldn't be just trying to defend the freedom position for freedom sake, but to find viable alternative solutions that don't mine the freedom of the population.
For example... we could try to use AI to detect if the images are AI generated or not :) And police should have the means to use AI, maybe given for free by the megacorp that benefit the most from AI
Joking apart (for I am joking, I'd never sponsor something that forces people to do things they don't want) My only point is that whenever I read something like this... well it stinks, because it goes against what I perceive as common sense.
Someone took my first comment too seriously, my point being that after so many studies read, weighted, measured and found wanting... I don't want to waste my time reading something that doesn't pass the smell test.
Who did they interview? People who have cargo bikes
Do they like them? Yes they bought them and either liked them to begin with, or are rationalizing, then there is a minority who's objective.
Ask people with Mercedes what's the car brand they like the most.
For example: I drive an Alfa Romeo and once I was stopped by a guy (in Germany) that asked me if I wanted to join a Italian Car Club... and he was the proud driver of a FIAT Tipo, not a car I'd buy for it's beauty or one I'd show in a car club, yet he liked it, and we are discussing a study that hinges on what people like?
EDIT: just to say... I agree with you, there's a bit of selection bias at work here
What's the name of the continent where "America" is? :D
From a European perspective, American means from the continent America, and not specifically from the US. To me a Brazilian is as much American as a US citizen.