sainez

Even AGI as a whole is overhyped. It's a valuable goal, but AI that beats humans on narrow metrics is still economically valuable because of scale.

You should be able to adjust this with a system prompt, given that has end-to-end speech capabilities now

> Testing a dapp off the mainnet is like ensuring your website works on localhost

I would argue the exact opposite. A website will be deployed to different versions of different browsers on different operating systems. A smart contract will exist on a single distributed computer. It sounds like the actual problem is people treating smart contract development as cavalierly as web app development

How does this differ from e.g. online banking? Does every user manually check encryption algorithms and keys?

Don't know why this is downvoted. It is possible (and probably desirable) to build applications where only certain data is stored on chain.

It is at least partially automated. The issue was closed by a bot which requires a star to re-open.

But you would say you used "social engineering" to manipulate an organization: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_engineering_(security)

Alignment refers to the process of aligning AI with human values. I don't see why a superhuman AI would require different prompting than is in use today.

I'm much more interested in lower parameter models that are optimized to punch above their weight. There is already interesting work done in this space with Mistral and Phi. I see research coming out virtually every week trying to address the low hanging fruit.

I'm not sure what more information people need. The original announcement was pretty clear: https://openai.com/blog/openai-announces-leadership-transiti....

Specifically:

> Mr. Altman’s departure follows a deliberative review process by the board, which concluded that he was not consistently candid in his communications with the board, hindering its ability to exercise its responsibilities.

> it remains the fundamental governance responsibility of the board to advance OpenAI’s mission and preserve the principles of its Charter.

So the board did not have confidence that Sam was acting in good faith. Watch any of Ilya's many interviews, he speaks openly and candidly about his position. It is clear to me that Ilya is completely committed to the principles of the charter and sees a very real risk of sufficiently advanced AI causing disproportionate harm.

People keep trying to understand OpenAI as a hypergrowth SV startup, which it is explicitly not.

What is with the misinformation.

The original Verge article says (with no given sources): > missing a key 5PM PT deadline by which many OpenAI staffers were set to resign.

The tweet removes the qualifier: > The staff at OpenAI set a 5PM deadline for the entire board to resign, or else they quit and join Sam in his new company.

And you seem to parrot that point even though it is well past that deadline and no news of mass resignations

And with well-intentioned people who tried to warn people of catastrophes that went unheeded

There is no world in which Microsoft leaves their GPT4 customers dead in the water.

> Microsoft doesn’t have ownership rights to OpenAI IP. They license it.

Honest question, do you have a source for that? Is it conceivable that Microsoft has some clause that grants them direct access to IP if OpenAI does not meet certain requirements. It is difficult to believe that Microsoft handed over $10B without any safeguards in place. Surely they did their due diligence on OpenAI's corporate structure.

Equating Ilya to the average B.S. in Computer Science is like equating Sam to a used car salesman. Neither are true and both were instrumental in the success of OpenAI.

> Now they are trying to get him back.

OpenAI has never claimed they want Sam back. The article claims OpenAI's investors want him back.

I will agree that OpenAI could have done a better job of letting him go if there truly were irreconcilable differences.

It seems you are conflating OpenAI the non-profit, with OpenAI the LLC: https://openai.com/our-structure

If it was a simple disagreement in direction then (1) the transition wouldn't be so abrupt and (2) they wouldn't publicly call him a liar.

I agree this is the most likely explanation. Is it possible Sam tried to wrestle power away from the board? He wouldn't even need to sell the whole company, just enough tech for a large company to kill OpenAI.

I believe he is @anotherpaulg

Your comment makes it seem like a bad thing. Waymo has the right approach: only applying their technology where they are confident it will not cause issues.

Parent comment is on the right track. It sounds like you want to fine tune an llm to mimic the conversation style between you and your friend. Then you can use a general embedding model to implement RAG so that the application can "recall" pieces of your conversation.

Another example is J. Cole's song Neighbors: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nfVWiXY3WY. I went to his concert for this album and he spoke on how frustrating it was to rise out of extreme poverty and reach the pinnacle of the music world and still have to be subjected to traumatic incidents with the police. There was zero evidence for this raid and they still destroyed his property and disabled his cameras.

You can obviously provide the same abstraction with different implementations that yield different performance characteristics. Julia provides the same level of flexibility (if not more) as Python without any of the design decisions which cause Python to be so slow. I fail to see how this is a contentious point.

I also have dealt with sleep issues. A few notes in case anyone is the same and looking for ideas.

The thing that had the biggest effect for me is eliminating caffeine. It has a pretty long half life and I believe I metabolize it slower than the average person. Most sources say it is ok to consume it in the morning, but in my case even morning consumption was enough to significantly disrupt my sleep. When I got to the point that even a can of coke was stimulating, I observed a complete cessation of night time restlessness.

The other thing that helped reliably, although to a lesser degree, was getting ~15 minutes of natural sunlight in the morning. In terms of supplements, a combination of lemon balm (mildly increases gaba) and agmatine sulfate (mild nmda antagonism) occasionally helps. I try to use supplements as a last resort, as I try to fix the issues upstream.

I think this speaks to the complexity of our bodies, something you do in the morning can have a significant effect in how you feel at night. It is also wild how our culture normalizes things that go against the healthy functioning of our bodies. I know many people who only get sunlight walking to their car. The human body is amazingly complex, there is certainly much more for us to understand.

> what this might mean in practice is that you do mockups of all of the expected pages and what data is necessary on each one. then you design a schema that results in you never having to do joins on the majority, if not all, of them.

Great suggestion! I had a role where I helped a small team develop a full stack, data-heavy application. I felt pretty good about the individual layers but I felt we could have done a better job at achieving cohesion in the big picture. Do you have any resources where people think about these sorts of things deeply?

Great point about working on teams. For the vast majority of tasks, people are only marginally better or worse than each other. A few people with decent communication will outpace a "star" any day of the week.

I try to remind myself of this fact when I'm frustrated with other people. A bit of humility and gratitude go a long way.

It is mentioned in this article about the inception of AWS's custom silicon: https://semiconductor.substack.com/p/on-the-origins-of-aws-c...

> “We use the terms one-way door and two-way door to describe the risk of a decision at Amazon. Two-way door decisions have a low cost of failure and are easy to undo, while one-way door decisions have a high cost of failure and are hard to undo. We make two-way door decisions quickly, knowing that speed of execution is key, but we make one-way door decisions slowly and far more deliberately.”