We got so far with transformers and huge amounts of compute and huge amounts of data.
If we can get an architecture that is able to extract a slightly higher order of reasoning it will have a cascading effect when we apply the same level of compute and data.
I see lots of potential for progressive improvement in this direction.
Problem is, it's quite expensive to develop and test new architectures, but that's were the financial capital comes in.
With all the capital behind these LLM companies, I would be surprised if we don't see any architectural improvements that lead to better reasoning. Training bigger and bigger models is clearly not sustainable, so I'm sure all of them are working in this direction.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is the first time that AI has so much financial capital behind it.
Populism is just democracy taking the reigns back from the entrenched political establishment. There is nothing democratic about a social class of bureaucrats gatekeeping all political offices.
If anything, it seems to me that populism is necessary to overcome the local minimum that the political landscape settles in from time to time.
From a game theoretical perspective this is a good result. It is a clear reiteration of the message to the Democrats: you won't win by claiming to be 0.1% less bad.
The Democrats should have fielded a strong personality in their own right. This is not about left or right. It's about mobilizing people by giving them something to care about. "More of the same" and "not like that guy" isn't very enticing.
I don't think the policy positions even matter that much, if you can make a strong case and gain the confidence of the electorate.
There is just no upside to founding your tech startup in the EU. You'll just be at a disadvantage. And as long as we have a unified US/EU market, this is not something that can be fixed. This has always been the downside of any kind of trade agreement that opened up the markets to foreign competition. Typically, the two parties pick winners and losers. Europeans export cheese and wine and Americans export Google and Facebook.
My reading of this: the EU wants to give its old fashioned SME software houses a chance with their software products, against the likes of FAANG that typically offer the software for free.
Of course this also hurts EU startups, but that does not concern Brussels because the whole EU establishment is always defending the incumbents. And this is imho one of the reasons the EU is falling behind, because incumbents don't react well to paradigm shifts. It's a losing strategy. For all its many faults the US seems to have realized a long time ago that you cannot protect incumbents at the cost of startups.
I'm very happy with this one and in general I agree with the theories put forth.
That press release is a bit fucked though. Where did European colonizers create inclusive economic institutions? In the US? Australia? Canada? South Africa? That's not an accurate portrayal of what really happened.
Why is there only one Apple, anyway? It does not make sense to me.
Their niche is luxury consumerism + overbearing paternalism.
I don't think that is hard to replicate.
Since BlackBerry gave up on making smartphones, there is no other phone manufacturer trying for the same market. Sure you can buy an Android with cutting-edge tech specs, but you don't get the Apple customer experience and the brand recognition.
I think, most people who want to be immortal are actually motivated by either the fear of death, or the desire to travel far and experience life in the future. But these are distinct motivations.
Immortality itself does not compute. It just does not make sense. You are a product of your time. So if you end up 10000 years in the future, what is going to happen? It wouldn't be good if you were still you, a 2000 millennium person. So lets say you managed to evolve entirely to become a 10000 millennium human (if that's even a thing). Then, you're not really you anymore. There is no discernible continuity. So in effect it's like you died and were reborn multiple times over. "Immortality" only really makes sense over smaller timescales on the order of centuries, at most.
I can tell you, I have relatives who were alive before WWII and although they are alive, they are not part of the present. They are not fascinated by AI, they are not on Instagram or TikTok, they are not really partaking in the present, but mostly reminiscing the life they used to have in their childhood and early adulthood.
Not directly answering your question, but if I were in your exact position, I would consult for local startups. I don't mean, being a programmer for hire. I mean actual expertise consulting. I think that would be super fun, and a way to invest in early startups without putting your hard earned $$$ at risk.
Here's a question since everyone keeps bringing up the DotCom bubble. Although the bubble burst, have not the people who were building in the 1999, still more than made up for their losses by having the know-how and being able to capitalize on the subsequent emergence of the WWW as we know it today?
Growing up we used to have these kid/youth centres that were run by local Catholic organizations. We used to hang out there after school. Ostensibly the point was that there'd be 30 minutes of catechism doctrine, but we didn't really care about that. To us it was just a the place where everyone would be. I miss that so much. A place where you can just go and meet people your age, without any reason to be that and without having to pay an entrance fee.
Now as a grown up we have community centers, which are run, not by the Church, but by sort of hippie-lefty people. But it's not really the same atmosphere, because you go there, and it's just one demographic of people. It's not quite the same.
There's also pubs and climbing gyms which people often use as low effort places where one can mingle, but again, it's not quite the same. I don't like drinking multiple times a week and I really don't like climbing.
Ah, my memory is failing me, but I wanted to recommend you a career path. IIRC it was about creating formal certifications for industry to follow. It includes little actual maths, but lots of formal reasoning and therefore well suited for mathematicians. I remember some people gave a recruitment talk at our uni's math department in Germany about this very, little known career path. Jobs exist both in the public sector (als Beamter) and private sector too.
Somebody maybe help me remember the actual job title. I cannot recall what they are called in neither English nor German.
DISCLAIMER: If you have back/spine problems and you delay surgery because you hope the problem would go away on its own, with healthy living, you might end up with damaged/dead nerves which is irreparable damage, which even a delayed surgery cannot fix.
With regards to for-profit medicine, this is why I hate all market based health insurance systems. Even if you are rich and get treated like a king, you still have to question whether your doctor/surgeon is trying to sell you a procedure. The only system that does not suffer from this issue is the NHS (e.g. UK) where the incentive is lacking. The debate about health care systems tends to focus on availability and coverage, but this for-profit perverse incentive is orthogonal to all that.
What exactly is causing the fiction? Is it that there are some laws that make cross-border funding a challenge?
Or is it simply that it is hard to network and gain the confidence of VCs if you don't live close to where they operate from?