This kind of thinking assumes quantitative changes never result in qualitative change. Which is demonstrably false. Obviously there are thresholds where phase transitions happen.
Take saltwatwer and cell. After some threshold of saltiness is passed, the water flow reverses from into the cell to away from the cell. And the cell frikkin dies.
You tested it, i doubt you authored it. A paternal twin can have one with good impulse control and another who's more instinctual. Even in the same family and upbringing.
I'm reminded of a kid, and there is always such a kid, whose parents put them in front of everyone and asked them, 'what do you want to be when you grow up?'. And when they answered, 'i want to be a president!' Everyone cheered and clapped and remarked how cute they were.
The kid's lying of course, he just said what he knew they wanted to hear. He didn't mean any of it. But i find this disgusting, especially because it's pervasive basically with everyone, me, you probably, in the age of social media, just a little more sophisticated.
Louis CK, in a different way, said that you shouldn't do that. If your bit is 'i want to be a president' then all your thoughts should be of how you want to be a president, not of cheers or of bombing the bit.
Most people don't mean what they say. That's why they don't feel compelling. And it's so sickening to us, that we flee to the media, actors, politicians, who seem to say things, say things they mean. The ultimate irony is that ofc they do, they are performing. They dont mean it either.
So I guess, realize it's all performance. And try to mean what you say.
Yeah mathematicians tend to do that. Physicists not so much I think. However, none of what he says about AI is such a strong prediction, unlike the 'crackpots' that are probably on your mind.
Might not be solveable. At some point the effort in finding that someone might be larger than the benefit you get from just using the second, third, fourth best. Or using some flawed approximation hiring mechanism. There's just so much noise now. And it hits the good job seekers too.
Dario is no John hammond though. That'd be altman. He actually has the discipline and background as an ai scientist to tell what the potential failure modes are. You're right, he might still be just hyping things up, but generally i'd give more benefit of doubts to anthropic. Precisely because Dario was a scientist and I'd stand by it. People who get their phd in science already self-select, or proven at least to be made of different stuff.
Likewise, people don't as easily blame ilya for 'hyping things up' when he said these things.
Also talk about incentives, there are also incentives to lower their valuation. If you wanna be vigilant against social engineering i'd be wary of that too.
These are moot anyway though cause the article isnt even making any super strong claim. If you read it it's no big deal
Gives them the freedom to interpret it 'case by case' which is to mean punishing businesses and states not aligned with Trump with a million inconveniences, while leaving his base unmolested. The most divisive and punitive president ever.
At one point you just have to look at a mirror and ask, what would impress you.
Also why pay anyone, when they can keep up with all the papers that not one man can read them all? That seems to me like wasted money.
Another point is that that's not how AI training works anyway. It's much easier to put it in context rather than re-train them with every bit of random maths you find out. Things at the tail-end of the power law doesn't stick. At least, last I checked...
Sure if the goal is entertainment and sports, you're right. However, unlike chess or counter strike it's downstream from a real needed utility. Like, is there a point to do it anymore? (ofc there is, but still, it's been devalued from the perspective of the 'real utility')
It's worth mentioning that swiss is a nation of 9 million, whereas Japan has 128 million people. I'm not sure how comparable it is. You probably don't need to pass through a lot of settlements for any public projects in swiss, for example.
For me the question is just, do you think it's a disorder or not. Would you take a medication for it, if there is such a thing. If yes to both, Then, it's not really you. You are just who you choose to be.
It has a lot of good ideas that are probably true, although some are rediscovering things psychology had found out long ago.
Actually you know what can cause big personality change? A good plastic surgery/facial correction. I heard it's actually one of the few things that can do that. And a positive one, too; towards more confidence and extrovertedness (if you think it's 'positive'), a trait most psychologists considered fixed in any other cases. But I can't find the source right now, or if I even heard it. But it makes perfect sense to me. Like a good jaw realignment that fixed your whole face, blaw, suddenly you're this other person.