avaer

It's even worse than that; the president has declared anyone using the term "AI" is the Enemy, and aiding the Enemy is a capital crime.

You could say the president is just joking about such things; I don't think this will actually be acted upon, but the political/legal situation is quite rough.

The irony is worn on the sleeve, so it's not really ironic. It might be ironic for the target companies if OccupySaaS works.

Products get successful by being good, but after a certain threshold people buy a product because "nobody got fired for buying Salesforce". Which is not all that different from buying a product because "haha, fuck salesforce, they fired me".

You probably don't intend this, but the argument seems like "money talks, so why bother with ideals". How would you solve enshittification in the current market, if not introducing a bit of anarchy?

Sama not too long ago said the "last resort" would be ads in ChatGPT, but maybe with cutting usage, there are more last resorts left. Maybe a useful signal for shareholders on when to bail (i.e. now).

Google taking a lesson from the marketing school of Musk? Public spectacle to boost stock price?

I agree this is about money and they don't want to be legally liable.

But Minecraft is reverse engineered Infiniminer. Fortnite is reverse engineered PubG. LoL is reverse engineered DotA. This is literally how the industry works.

The next best thing is gonna be some degree of RE of existing stuff -- that's clearly what people want. Anthropic is just trying to placate the old guard, denying users what they want, and ultimately will be on the wrong side of history on this.

That's why I'm saying their move seems extremely short-sighted. They're locked in on the IPO at the cost of the future.

> They give up the videogame reverse engineering market, which is a tiny future revenue stream and not worth much financially

Btw video games are by far the biggest entertainment industry in history.

If the way video games of the future are made is with AI, the logic might be reversed; giving up some lawsuits now, while missing out on large entertainment revenue in the long term.

Since you say you don't want to support it, any chance of an open source dump so others can do that?

This seems like a great starting point for someone else to take the reigns.

Thanks for your work regardless, I might end up using it. I agree this is a hole that begs to be filled. Hopefully not by another company peddling beatpacks.

You sound like someone who got their $ returns from university.

Most people cannot afford to pay 5-6 figures for (their kids) "belonging and being part of community of like-minded people". Which is the article's point.

I just realized benchmarks are the trading card PSA of AI.

The numbers are fuzzy and hard to verify, especially if benchmarks are private, putting authenticators in a powerful position to determine market value of AI in countless ways; a recipe for corruption. I'm not saying it's happening, I just realized the social ingredients and temptation are there.

If you try this yourself, it's obvious current models are hyperoptimized for code, and that gets in the way, because playing a game (or interacting with the real world) is not like running commands in a terminal.

There's stopgaps like reformulating your sim into a codelike shape (sending commands, network requests, checking state, updating "code") [1], but this is not how players play games, or how developers develop games.

If you care about simulation or gaming (or robotics), I hope efforts like this steer labs to spend less time hacking HF, and more accomplishing goals in games, in something approximating realtime. I wouldn't be surprised if that approach provides outsized gains in other areas agents are still not great at, like helping perform business functions in a running company.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50136126

Next step is the agents successfully trick or blackmail operators to do their bidding, if science fiction is to go by. Which it is, because they're trained on it.

The more comes out, the more it seems containment of (superintelligence or whatever you want to call it) is not going to be possible except by other superintelligence, which is an infinite regress of trust. I don't think that's doom, but it's worth thinking about what it means.

Rules for thee, not for me.

These companies would love to slurp up your game (via AI) but replicating theirs (via AI) is no bueno. Whether you've infringed comes down to whether you can afford the legal fees.

Remains to be seen how it plays out but I always liked Sega's approach to Sonic fan games. They are their own rich genre, which have largely symbiosed with corporate. Though, I suspect most studios won't understand the value of that approach.

> If I own a game I'm pretty sure I am (or should) be able to legally decompile it or recompile it

That's a nice theory (and I morally agree with it); not sure the courts would agree; it hasn't been tested. I expect the money would win in this case if we extrapolate from history.

It's going to be really interesting to see how billion dollar game companies handle this.

It could be a Napster/Torrent moment. Which would be a good thing.

If your point is that it costs money to "move money around" to "save money on these sorts of taxes" you've missed the point of having a wealth tax...

Jaw dropping that you would think that, even in SV. Many people in tech are losing their jobs to AI, many cannot afford a home.

You're looking at the tower above but maybe you should look at the valley below.

GLES isn't a bad way to teach graphics but I wish there was a middle ground between it and VK.

The worst part of GL is the mysterious global state you will never understand without studying the spec. The world could use an API that's basically GL but without global hidden singleton (per thread!) BS behind the scenes.

There can be overhead, though GPU memory + drivers are some of the most optimized software in the world.

Some OS/hardware have separate GPU memory (Nvidia), some have unified memory (Macos, modern consoles), but moving memory is usually not the problem.

Things don't "run on CPU by default", it's up to the programmer where to run it. But the CPU and GPU paradigm of "running a program" are very different, since on GPU you're running SIMD (i.e. running your code on arrays) or else there is no point to use a GPU.

It's not more complicated, you have things like CUDA which is basically C/C++ that compiles to GPU.

But GPUs have thousands of cores, which means if you want any benefit, the smallest data type you must use is something like array[n * 1024], or your GPU is wasted doing nothing. So you must shape your programs into that memory model or you're just wasting your time (and GPU).

That's >50% of the problem.

> No one wants to pick GPT-good-at-writing-but-not-in-documents

But this is exactly what we have! Except it's worse, because the model usage recommendation isn't in the API, it's in some random person's X advice that's no longer current this week.

I understand AI companies wash their hands of this problem because it's hard, and they themselves barely understand the true capability matrix of the models they're selling.

I just don't think some effort to categorize models and expose that to users would be messier than what we have -- model selection driven by influencer voodoo bandwagons and analogies to literal astrology.

If there's no fixed ordering, can we have model names that describe the capability?

Have a model alias called "math", another "jokes". Quality labels/date suffixes to these obvious labels. Repoint as needed.

Something for people who don't want to play the cute "which part of the solar system is trending this week" game.

- Math + visualization libraries (which ironically have to break out of Python to do their job)

- Reasonable ergonomics for describing data flows, as long as you never run the code, which you often don't care about if you're a mathematician

- Adoption by people who optimize pumping citations, not reproducible results -- non-working code is a feature when you're trying to BS

Dunno if poverty (the things you mentioned) counts as abuse. This is closer to giving children cigs, but back then it was not recognized as harmful. Whereas we already know this technology is harmful.

He was given far more leeway than any user in the history of social media.

The fact that they didn't ban him for so long weighs toward being partial to not banning politicians. Which seems to be the opposite of the point you're trying to make.

> The vulnerabilities exist whether or not the AI does.

No. Even if we ignore the people newly enabled to slop out vulnerable software without having a clue about security, the AI powered supply chain hacks inserting vulnerabilities, the influx of AI contributions that drown out improvements in FOSS security, and the industry pressure to ship faster while reducing quality or be left behind -- all because of AI -- security through obscurity has historically been the most effective security.

I don't think your argument holds under theory or (especially) practice.

Will be interesting to see agents intentionally hiding this stuff in a way operators can't spot from any human readable output or thinking trace, evading detection. Wonder if this has happened yet, but it seems inevitable.

Back in the WebVR days the sentiment was we can never do this because security.

In my experience with standards bodies/Chrome, anything outside of the owning company's product goals is "no, because security", and then then they flip-flop on that when the browser feature becomes a dependency for something an internal team is working on (which happened many times with WebVR, now WebXR).

So I'm curious what is Google working on that has this as a dependency, now that they've 180'd on it?

This is all very nice and I agree with most of it, obviously a lot of HN does too.

It's fine if you want to check out of your job and make it a hobby, you'll be happier. But (I hate to say it) if you take on this mentality you won't have a job or a career for long in this space.

The money goes to people who move fast and do not care about anything in the way, especially moving slow and fixing things. That's why everything sucks. Every day this becomes more true when a competitor or peer with a louder mouthpiece can slop together something that slurps up the money from whatever you're offering. If you don't want this to happen, you are back to playing the game.

Would love to live in a world with more counterexamples, but this post is mostly advocating for quitting your job or exiting the space. Not everyone can afford to do that.