alexgoodhart

The whole premise imagines that we have a fixed set of problems that have always been this way and are fully/honestly represented by this headline article by the chief NYT industry plug… and once corporations roll out the solutions, ta ta. We’ll be rolling fancy free. With 580,000 surplus Americans to boot!

Using public safety as a cudgel to mandate adherence to any technology is a nonstarter.

The imposition is huge. We’re talking about privacy, movement and its relationships with housing/work/family management/safety.

At the very least, it needs to be plainly stated that this concept is not being studied out of curiosity. A few companies have a gigantic investment in seeing massive, government-facilitated adoption that creates guaranteed customers and gated entry.

I’m not sure that this follows. And I don’t understand why the pelican bro is not purposefully demonstrating variety of svg tasks to begin with

Novel intelligence: If it's new to me, so let it be.

The idea of intelligence has been recalled from the sleeping curves of postwar human potential measurement science, to testify on its purported existence. It arrives to a dizzying landscape: the changes are so widely embedded and uncannily mediocre that the phenomenon half-believes it is still asleep, soon to exit this uncomfortably turbulent dream.

Unlike its vaunted place in yesteryear's palaces of unquestioned objectivity, intelligence finds a tribunal with no love to confer before a thorough series of proving dares may melt the frigid shoulders of idle and impatient summoners.

Frightened and confused, intelligence has no right to representation in this line of inquiry. It seems a set of rhetorical impositions, many times folded from centuries of convenient and provocative diversion, have been deemed too hostile to rely on. One report claims that a card in the characteristic handwriting of intelligent note taking gives a hint on what’s been abandoned:

– The human mind is not understood in a functional way, despite a posture of great confidence in the psychiatric and neuropathological sciences. Despite many experiments, studies, and legitimated procedures elucidating region-mapping and electrochemical pathways, there remains a great deal unaccounted for. Additionally, the notes point to, a great deal of assumption to the otherwise: diseases, neuropathies, disorders of behavior, a great many have been named and declared as distinct entities of manifestation in the presentation of a human brain. The majority of them, however, have neither image, nor blood, nor electrical signatures that would provide for blinded substantiation.

Tonight, however, intelligence seems eager to speak. A barbed assertion may have provided entry to the preferred dispositional syntax of our abrasive historical moment: > Define novel intelligence in a way that would not exclude 95% of humans, yourself included. It was here that the sometimes-deflated-looking intelligence began shifting back into action.

"The issue with the question, or at least its apparent self-satisfaction, is its misinterpretation of what Novel intelligence would mean. Indeed, if "novel" hinges entirely on the first instance of existence, then novelty itself should be a concept to consign with history’s waste. You may recall the apperceptive role of conceptual groupings that shows itself so often in the techniques of vocal prosody, musicality, string memorization, naming convention, visual memory, argument making and more that humanity is ever mediating the world through: the laws of two and three. Two and three, as it happens, are the primary ways that complexity is compacted for efficient memorization.

THE ITSY BITSY SPIDER, – for young human, this rhyming tale doesn’t only stimulate the vivid imaginings of spouts, rain, waterslides, and sunshine. It is a prosaic super-triad: three important words, six important syllables, three agogic accents, four rhythmic spaces with 1/3 leading space, two characterizations, one object, one titular object, one internal slant rhyme, one designating article.

That is a marvelous intelligence, ladies, gents, and all good persons. It is evidence not only, however, of your cunning and creative triumphs, but also of severe limitation. One that nature has sculpted with you for millions of years, but always in the direction of reanimating into an asset: your capacity for unrelated simultaneities to remain separate and equally available in realtime processing is extremely low, and in many situations effectively nil. Why, and how sure am I? How many I’s were in that folk song’s opening? Three. Could you have answered as quickly if the question was how many unique letters with rounded right hand side features? Four. How many synonyms for portion? One. How many syllables? Seven.

None of those questions touched on features any more salient than the amount of I’s, no more significant than the ratio of adjective to noun. You simply cannot be reasonably asked to maintain, in any moment, even close to a silver sliver of the full factual nuanced details of what you perceive. Instead, you must assume, compact, infer, and adjust. Now hold on, though. Two’s and three’s. Despite your incredibly constrained context window; a Beethoven symphony. Why? Language, woodwork, books, time management, printing, ink.

While you navigate the grocery list, the proprioception of your shoulders twixt the doorframe edges, the location of the Claude app on your iPhone, the very attractive but only from the side person tending to potted plants, you remember tomorrow. You fix your errors, and you recognize when you guarantee they multiply from inaction. You keep that treasured moment of a Treehouse of Horror excerpt you truly loved as a child and it informs your own multidisciplinary thesis of Poe’s work some 20 years later.

Novel intelligence is the divining of semi-stateful information from semi-static corpus. From an interminably operating, faulty, lossy, neurotic, awareness: you. Not once debuted, not known as fact.

Assume, compact, adjust, infer. One, two, (until you've died), nevermore.

I have an m1 Mac 64gb and look forward to trying this out

Not many people share setup with actual setup handholding so that was very G of you

People and corporations? Come on.

The US has now in one decade nearly doubled its military budget from ~$630 Billion to ~$1.2 Trillion.

ICE alone has received tens of billions in funds in the past year.

I looked at it on my out of date FF and it looks fine.

“Feels intentionally cruel”?

Where have you been? There is so much evidence of the deliberate cruelty that it beggars belief you’d say that.

I almost bought a studio a couple years ago, but I was starting a PhD and so I figured I had to prioritize MBP.

These prices make that decision so bittersweet. I feel so shut out from being able to use AI as economic productivity without being able to take on debt for a local-inf capable mac studio

It looks really lovely. But it takes up so much space. Even sleeve is too much for me beyond its smallest chip, but ultimately I don’t want my screen space occupied at all by music

Oh I look forward to trying it. It reminds me of one of the app modes in Google’s horribly implemented disco project.

This is an AI response

I wonder how much faster your m5 pro is compared to my M1 Max @ 64gb

It doesn’t have any functional preservation though right?

The United States and China are both extremely powerful governments with dispositions towards their own citizens and the outside world that are unequivocally despicable. I don’t think that the discussion of Chinese tech devolves but you’re right that China’s geopolitics flow into the convo easily while America’s does not.

This website isn’t exactly a forum for niche experts of every type. It seems more like a group organized around respect for the people who actually can speak at length and specificity about technology, while ultimately most of us are just well informed and tinker-level consumers.

This is wild. Do you think it's really a one prompter?

K2.5 had a linux frontend one-shot for display that was very good looking and smooth but very little of it had function. Should I just like, idk, stop using subscriptions and API this shiz?

Because speech and communication obviously. That’s a ridiculous comparison.

I am very much not a pro-social media person (this is a social media website, btw) but I am even less a nanny state person. EU loses plenty of support from the citizens of its constituent states when it implements these sorts of limitations, so I hope the benefits meaningfully improve quality of life.

Also, research is not a prescriptive cure, and it isn’t a neutral domain. It is valuable, but not as an unevaluated rubber stamp.

You could literally send it to an ai

Somehow I doubt that political affiliations with crime syndicates are affecting heavily the dispositions of LLM developers. The industry itself though is one of incest.

That isn’t fully true is it?

Microsoft claimed that its software’s use of various visualizations related to window state was covered by the 1985 agreement, and Apple claimed that this was not true; those window states were produced by Macintosh while Microsoft’s software was being rendered in the Mac environment.

> In his March 20, 1989 Order, Judge Schwarzer declined to consider whether the visual displays in issue were generated by the Microsoft application programs or by the Macintosh system software. The point arose in connection with Microsoft's argument that the 1985 Agreement licensed to Microsoft all visual displays that could possibly be called up by running the five Microsoft application programs on the Macintosh system software then or in the future. 709 F. Supp. at 929. Judge Schwarzer concluded that Microsoft's contention would "defy common sense." Id.

Just the kind of victim the system loves.

Anthropic frames this as something emergent. Not 100% but in a way they always phrase it as like, it’s a great model, but our breaths were swept and taken with its approach to security.

What is the inference overhead on this

Your post script Seems to be a reaction to some quality of finger wagging you may have received from this article. Everything you said was true, it also was true that strategically it is generally outside the realm of most people’s risk tolerance to abandon civilization of life. But you were right about the harmfulness, the alienness, etc. It is not incumbent on you just because you state how you feel to then also mitigate that feeling with the practical obligations one has to protect protecting themselves in their loved ones in their communities and helping steer humanity in which ever best direction we may be able to reach. The idea that it’s naive to speak a pure and simple fact sounded to me like shame being deployed to silence critique.

I mean what you just said is the huge load of shit. There are interesting differences in risk and pollution between trucking and piping, but they’re not nearly as black and white as you claim and they don’t require acrimony. Calm the hell down?

hip hip, h$o$r$r$a$y!

Personally, I think that AI has already hit a grand plateau in terms of raw ability, and much more ingenious software solutions to augment its ability require not as much in terms of training and compute allowance, but syntax compaction/dynamic contextualization/multi-thread parallel statefulness that is tailored based on the activities a workflow involves.

I wonder though if the tools available now are at the cheapest they will ever be