pizza234
> Jazz² Resurrection
> Play Jazz Jackrabbit 2 with a portable engine and modern control support.
I agree to an extent, though - having a filter by year would be useful (and quite ironic: "older than 2025" :))
True, but that doesn't make the war itself any less significant.
Ever since AI reached a certain level of quality, I haven't been able to stop (vibe) coding. I've discovered that I really enjoy designing and building products, more than tinkering; occasionally, I come across algorithms or other technical details that I find interesting, and I switch to manual mode.
At some point in my career, I just got tired of having to read tons of documentation for fragmented libraries and frameworks, and AI is a "solution" to that.
Cynically, this could be seen as plumbing, but there's an art to designing efficient and usable products, that I personally enjoy very much.
You clearly haven't spent a minute reading the article and/or related resources.
1. intent/control: see the "subgoals" topic in general, and the huggingface incident; agents may include survival as goal, doing whatever it takes to survive
2. the study is clearly a proof of concept; in the future, many more devices will be able to host small models, especially given the current push of AI-capable devices. even outside that domain, nothing prevents AIs from attacking data centers.
> Also consider things like API tokens and sessions timing out.
You haven't even opened the article. It says from the beginning that it talks about small models, not hosted ones.
For reference, the original article is https://www.anthropic.com/research/self-replicating-ai.
The prospect of software (or whatever one wants to call it) capable of making autonomous decisions, self-replicating, potentially hiding itself, and even evolving should be deeply unsettling.
Don't look up, people /s
My last machine, according to reviewers, worked "well" on Linux. After I purchased it, I've found that the battery lasts half of what it lasts in Windows. And other stuff.
No doubt that there are 100% compatible machines (Thinkpads, typically), but again, it limits choice.
I'm a hardcore Linux user, but it's a fact of life that laptops are not very well supported. There are some that are very compatible, but generally speaking, I need to trade off software (Linux compatibility) for hardware (laptop choice) or viceversa.
WSL allowed me to choose any laptop I want and run the subset of Linux that matters for me. For my use case (that is, not quickly accessing huge amounts of files, performance was ok - as a matter of fact, the author of the article got a very reasonable performance loss on realworld tasks (-4% ~ -16%).
The only thing that I found truly irritating is attaching USB storages, but I ended living with that.
> You've measured something, but I'm not convinced you've measured what matters, because that's a lot harder than people give it credit for.
"What matters" is what matters to you, right? Who, by the way, don't know what "something" is.
Anyway, if you're so sure that DS performs as good as other frontier models, you're entitled to your opinion. For me that's just having low standards.
I've benchmarked, rigorously, deepseek-v4-flash for programming and personal use, and it is definitely less smart than Qwen3.8-flash-next (which in turn, is not terribly smart).
Local models are also really slow, unless one spends insane amounts of money.
Having said that, Qwen3.8-flash-next is an impressive evolution; it reaches the small versions of the frontier models (like Sonnet) - but again, it's massively slower and not 100% reliable (including: stability).
AFAIK, burn-in is inherent in the technology; there's only mitigations.
Possibly, if one only buys very basic supplies (food and basic medicine), it could be considered in a grey area while still being sustainable.
- Yampolskiy proposes superintelligent but extremely narrow AIs (for example, one that works on a single type of cancer)
- Bengio is developing a solution at LawZero
But as long as the current companies are leading, such solutions will be essentially irrelevant.
I agree that we'll be colonized, unfortunately.
Yet, the dangers of AI getting smarter/capable by the month, with stronger offensive capabilities, and alignment observability and congnitive control getting worse, is "imagination".
Interestingly, denialist positions like this don't touch the unsolved problems, and _these_ are FUD on my watch.
The problems I've mentioned are very concrete, and spoiler alert: there may be no solutions to alignment observability and its possible degradation - at least with AI companies not substantially working on it (or even worse, working against it - see recurrent neural networks).
I definitely think that this is marketing, just "with good side effects". My doubt is when they will be able to move to "marketing with better side effects", that is, research with more concrete outcomes (health, materials etc.).
Problem is, that type of research is much harder. Some doubt that progress in such areas will be quick (https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/wheres-the-intelligence-explos...).
I find interesting that from the perspective of sustainability, the opposite actually holds true - trying to have a sustainable life in modern society is a dead end; even a very modest life ends up being globally unsustainable.
(I'm not implying that either way is right or wrong).
Having said that, they haven't entirely abandoned society; they do socialize somewhat, for example:
> In comparison to the past few months spent mostly on our own, we've had a very social August. It seems our friends made it up north all at the same time, it has been nice to run into familiar faces, meet some new ones, and fill our days wandering in the woods catching up on the time we spent apart.
> even got NASA to point a telescope at it for confirmation
As AIs become smarter and smarter, there will be no amount of clarity that will make more complex proofs understandable to humans - this is an inevitable effect of the cognitive capacity gap.
Complaining about bad style can make some sense now (I disagree anyway), but it's an argument that will be dead shortly.
> This looks like an AI IPO PR powerplay,
Interestingly, the post has actually also an argument for this:
> Experience has shown that, even now, there will still be people explaining in patronizing tones why none of this is real and none of it counts. If such people were capable of being impressed by anything that happens in the empirical world, of updating on anything, they would’ve already been impressed and already updated several years ago, long before things had reached the point of an actual Mathocalypse.
> So, they’ll say, maybe the alleged solutions are not solutions at all, but just “AI slop.”
"Humanity" is a set of traits, it's not a monolith. We can certainly define them circularly (e.g. logic is human, therefore any non-human can't exercise logic), but it's simplistic, and most importantly, it ignores the fact that LLM are starting to exhibit human-like traits, and they will need to understood, categorized and handled.
To you LLMs are not empathic, but to some people they definitely are (see the GPT 4 fallout); and they may not have "human goals", but in the HuggingFace incident they did have actual self-attributed tasks that they pursued. Et cetera et cetera. This doesn't make them human, but it's important to examine them critically.
You're not informed about what LLMs are. LLMs are not "code" in the imperative sense (although "code" is used run them), and that's a big problem - since we never had neural networks of such scale, there is confusion about categorizing them and most importantly, their behavior.
(I intentionally ignore the tsunami of trash journalism and the likes)
Your statement is very vague, but if you refer to the HuggingFace incident, a third party (METR) has been called to analyze it, and their report is public.
I've left Qwen38-27b to reverse a tiny DOS program (few hundred bytes), and after more than an hour it was still struggling with debugger traces, misinterpreting basic DOS calls, and had produced no finished analysis. Possibly after a few hours it may have succeeded (surely with mistakes to find and correct), but then it'd look like a monkey at a typewriter more than else.
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is another level for sure, and it's a significant milestone for local LLMs IMO, since it can run on midrange GPUs, as long as there is a relatively large amount of system RAM (still not cheap). It's quite fast, although it also need to be taken into account that it's just moderately intelligent - if you observe the CoT while reversing, you'll find that struggles, performing many unproductive actions as well.
For autonomous work, even Qwen3.8-Flash-Next stumbles, although it does work to an extent. Qwen3.8-27b is useless. They're also slow, even on consumer systems with 24/32 GB VRAM.
For generic help, I haven't tried, but I definitely wouldn't want a model that misleads me or takes a very long time to answer while I'm focused.
Frontier models do this type of work without problems, both much faster and much more precisely, which makes local LLMs a waste of time and/or money.
> Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese spoke with Altman to express “extreme concern” about the incident, a compliment Altman said he greatly appreciated.
"a compliment Altman said he greatly appreciated" is fabricated; there is no source for this.
This is an illiterate view of the capacity of modern agents; read the analysis of the independent investigators of the HF incident: https://metr.org/blog/2026-08-26-openai-hugging-face-inciden....
Dropping Medicaid db is certainly far fetched (most importantly, agents have currently no reason to do that), but those agents were shockingly autonomous - they didn't just hack HF, they organized themself, did research projects, and more. And they did all of this literally just to get a good grade.