temporalparts

A calculator is faster and cheaper and higher quality for the use cases I bind my task space to.

It's therefore misleading because they make people believe they're as general purpose as LLMs.

Setting aside the strict definition of IP, this does satisfy the philosophical motivation of IP, which is to protect people making significant capital investments.

This is not too different from drug discovery where it's extremely difficult to come up with the molecule, but relatively easy to copy it. Similarly, it's really hard to create frontier models from scratch but much easier to distill them.

This may surprise extreme altruists but there are people who genuinely care about profit motives and are only willing to make the world a better place at a price. I don't see software engineers in advertising and finance quitting their jobs en-masse to work for teach for america, doctors without borders, etc.

Also, the bulk of the cost of manufacturing a drug lives in the scientific & engineering exploration space, which we should incentivize.

Would love to learn more! What did you work on (even vertical: chemistry, medicine, materials, physics, cosmology, etc.), notable stories?

I'm not an expert, but I thought fan art that people try to monetize in some form is explicitly illegal unless it's protected by parody, and any non commercial "violations" of copyright is totally legal. Disney can't stop me from drawing Mickey in the privacy of my own house, just monetizing/getting famous off of them.

The problem isn't that people aren't aware that the scale and magnitude differences are large and significant.

It's that the space of intellectual property LAW does not handle the robust capabilities of LLMs. Legislators NEED to pass laws to reflect the new realities or else all prior case law relies on human analogies which fail in the obvious ways you alluded to.

If there was no law governing the use of death stars and mass murder, and the only legal analogy is to environmental damage, then the only crime the legal system can ascribe is mass environmental damage.

I saw an old man yesterday use a foldable for the larger screen for larger fonts. Maybe he was a hardcore tech enthusiasts, but larger screens is an important use case for many.

I think Terrance makes a great general point in general, but the specific claim is not always true: complex dynamics can arise from simple initial conditions, therefore, simple changes could resolve those complex dynamics.

Which one would you recommend for the greater Boston area?

This can't be a serious question.

US Government likes US Government control because it's themselves.

They don't want an adversary to have control. Is the distinction not obvious??

I know there is a documented case of a non-involved person getting injured, but do you have evidence that this attack was not 99% effective? The attack vector was the device specifically used only by involved people.

I mean, we have pistol, which is a smol cannon shooting.

I think the important argument for^1 is that this prevents other search engine from bidding on the slot. It certainly would be an issue for Google if Apple products defaulted to Bing.

I think there's some behind the scenes drama. It takes a LOT of time and investment from both sides to build up to a $23B offer. I wonder if there was something some Alphabet exec did to piss off the founders. Or Wiz was stringing Alphabet along to hype up the IPO.

I can't tell if people in this thread are negative about taxes or negative about funding local news, which is crucial for a robust democracy.

Yes, by making sure they don't hit back. The United States won a nuclear war against Japan in WW2. In theory, it's possible to intercept all the missiles from an enemy, see Iran's attack on Israel recently.

Nothing notably bad happens. Nuclear explosions are highly sensitive and engineered events. If you destroy the ignition mechanism, then it will become a dud.

FWIW, there has been a number of nuclear explosion tests in our atmosphere: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba

Where did you think ChatGPT got their training data?

Nature rarely* refactors. Sometimes random mutations refactors, which leads to efficiencies which leads to evolutionary advantages.

If nature doesn't refactor, then why are there so many crabs?

Going by the contrapositive: Since China doesn't perceive this as a declaration of war, then I guess by your binary logic Taiwan's an independent country.

How would the servers know where to route the poll requests without metadata? They wouldn't.

It's not possible to have a "web scale" that end-to-end encrypts metadata, because part of the metadata is understanding the recipient.

If the network or server has no idea where to deliver an encrypted message, then the only way to guarantee delivery is to send all the messages to all the users to unpack to see which ones are relevant to them, which fails "web scale"