I'm seeing that in Big Tech now - there's no room anymore and it's super short term thinking (couched in the language of long term thinking). It's a really dangerous game for an incumbent to fritter away the ability to innovate because there is only enough capacity to focus on the here and now.
Meta is fundamentally a media company and they're using AI towards that end. They don't seem to be productizing their tech beyond that in the medium term.
Are they even that? Their modus operandi has been to steal user credentials. Ads (which aren't targeted at all, the ads aren't even good, according to what people have said) are just an excuse to gather more data (Facebook syncs with your phone, it wipes out addresses in your phone book). It comes down to Zuck and who he is
The ads are effective, and the way they are effective is via targeting.
From the customer perspective, it works. The main problem is price competition for access to audiences. That's why fb revenues are what they are. The ads work, largely because ofntracmjng/targeting.
I don't unsubsubscribe unless I explicitly subscribed in the past. If I did not subscribe in the first place then it's spam (exception for small businesses who may not know better in which case I'll delete or unsubscribe).
I'll try unsubscribing once if it looks like a legitimate org, like someone I actually did business with but didn't expect them to email me. After that, it's going to the junk box to train the server what spam looks like.
Yeah you could easily imagine stenography like inputs and outputs for rapid iteration loops. It's also true that in social media people already want faster-to-read snippets that drop grammar so the desire for density is already there for human authors/readers.
How do those numbers look with similar products from Huawei, Samsung, etc...? Fairphone/HMD are competitors focused on repairability above other factors so it's not really a fair comparison.
I can go with the thesis that individuals need community control (boards, regulations, laws) in order to be accountable but is there some specific evidence that Amodei is the same? It seems like a "both sides" argument.
Community control typically doesn't work to constrain great men, a group has more weak points than an individual (look for example how easily Sam dismantled the OpenAI board decision by applying the right pressure).
The greatest and often only check on power has always been competition or opposition by other great men.
Not great men. People with "perceived" high networth. Banks will fall over backwards to loan them money. See Chase and Musk. Let's not associate perceived networth with "great"
I don’t need to convince you, we’ve been through enough cults of personality, time will tell. But I’ve been right enough times to back myself. Maybe it’s because I grew up around a lot of people like them? They can’t hide that they would say whatever they think you want to hear.
Actually it’s funny: Their lack of empathy/emotional intelligence would also make them susceptible to thinking that talking to an LLM is like talking to a person, so maybe they really did think AGI was around the corner!
This comment rings a bell quite a bit.
It’s easy enough to see these kinds of people.
I just was fired earlier this year for made up performance reasons after multiple years at Apple due to a guy like this.
These soulless people exist out there and they don’t care that your dog just passed away or your close family member gets cancer.
They just move forward with their agenda and are experts at telling you what they think you want to hear. 200%
This reminds me of Harvey Cragon's intro to computer architecture textbook...
When it introduces Harvard vs. Von Neumann architectures, it doesn't invent some dumb RISC computer to illustrate the difference... No... it makes you learn the actual von Neumann machine! Also Conrad Zuse Z machine.
Cragon's argument is that students will not learn the concept of engineering trade-offs, if presented with a clean "textbook" architecture.
I hated MIX for various reasons, it's sort of in-between simple and kludgy.
[0] Cragon was professor at University of Texas Austin ca 1980. Also the architect of TI's ASC in the 1960s.
AI is important but we don't know what skills will be relevant in 10+ years to harness AI (I can't imagine prompt engineering is much the same). Anyway, would a typical teacher be ahead of the curve on what pedagogical tack to take here even if it was appropriate?
The best thing to do is to set the kids up to learn the most important thing - which is how to teach oneself. If a kid can read about something, and then understand what was important from the reading, and then write about it, and then know where to go next they will be well served in the AI world.
reply