zarzavat
OpenAI, Anthropic, etc are locked in a race to create better models. They all have interpretability teams. Of course they train their models on every technique under the sun to understand and improve their models, including raw weights. The primary function of these models is to build their successor.
Traditional banks and crypto exchanges alike rely on the carefully cultivated illusion that you can withdraw your money at any time.
$6B is probably several billion too large for a hot wallet but it's not completely obscene for an operation of Binance's size.
That way read access to your infra provider is not sufficient, it requires an active component.
So we empower central banks to intervene in various ways in the monetary system in order to achieve low inflation and system stability.
Activity is only the secondary objective. System stability is the first. Stability doesn't mean that markets cannot go up and down even violently. It means that when they go violently up and down, there remains faith in the currency and people are not suffering from mass unemployment, etc.
When a currency is healthy and has low inflation, hard assets are not a threat. Gold doesn't pay any interest, it doesn't have any earnings. You don't need to convince people to buy stocks and bonds instead of gold, they do that by themselves.
When a currency is unhealthy, hard assets can become a threat to it, but notably it's usually other fiat currencies that are the biggest threat.
Hard assets are useful tools for the financial system because they are less correlated with the market. You can criticise Bitcoin in various ways but the criticism that it is a hard asset with a fixed supply that by not inflating somehow damages the financial or monetary system doesn't land. Fiat money is intended to facilitate the existence of markets in other things, including hard assets.
The existence of harder forms of money (gold, bitcoin, etc) is an expected consequence of how the system is designed, and not in any way a subversion of it. Somehow, both sides seem to miss this point.
"When you go shopping make sure to buy flour or else we won't be able to bake the cake"
"otherwise" is a more common word choice but "else" is definitely in the active vocabulary of modern English speakers.
Back in March, the Plus plan was marketed as the way to access Gemini 3.1 Pro, their top model. The free plan gave you a tiny quota of their Pro model, and the Plus plan gave you a generous quota, enough for chatting.
It was expected that 3.1 Pro would be upgraded to 3.5 Pro whenever that came out, but that model never materialized.
When Google finally had a new Pro model, not only did they not apologise for the delay, but they didn't upgrade the Plus plan, which is to this day stuck on this ancient model.
Fine, you might say. hey made the Pro model only for the Pro plan. What's the big deal?
But why, why, did they stop upgrading the Flash model as well?
So we've gone from "The Plus plan lets you access our top model with generous limits" to "The Plus plan only supports a months old second-tier model".
I'm sure that Google never explicitly promised that the Plus plan would receive upgraded models, but nevertheless it feels like being scammed.
Given that the smartphone industry also adopted high PPI displays as a minimum standard, it’s actually the external display industry that is the odd one out here. Low PPI displays should have gone the way of CRTs, but they cling on.
Apple's solution to reflections is to overpower them. I use my MacBook in some bright public spaces and reflections have never been an issue. For an iMac which is more likely than a laptop to be used in an environment with controlled lighting, it's just a non-issue.
If many houses install off-grid solar, it's still not going to have a negative effect on the grid because the change is spread out over time.
It does mean that less generating capacity is needed over the long term, but decision makers can just get that data directly from the grid. I don't see what extra information the permit is adding.
What many of us experienced this year is that Fable 5 and Opus 5.5 are good enough and future model improvements may have diminishing returns even if benchmarks improve.
I’m very excited for smarter models but what I really want now is not capability but speed, cost and open weights.
The biggest risk is not elderly people but rather the owner giving their passcode to someone else, e.g. a repair shop, who then enables jailbroken mode without the owner's knowledge and installs malware.
You can mitigate this problem, and the elderly person problem, by requiring the phone to be factory reset. That way any jailbreak would be extremely obvious.
As for being subject to prosecution for crimes that you didn't commit, you can either live in a jurisdiction where the justice system works more effectively, or else be rich and have a good lawyer.
A Rust implementation will have the fastest compilation speeds, memory safety, can easily be compiled to WASM, or compiled to a native node module.
A TypeScript implementation provides the most convenient way for TypeScript code to use the typescript package as a library. Pure JS, no native code or WASM dependencies. No FFI tax, can be jitted.
Go was always a compromise to make a port easier for humans. Go's GC makes it easier to keep the general code structure from the TS implementation. However that GC is also a liability, you sacrifice speed and embeddability.
Personally I'd prefer they went back to TypeScript for the reference implementation, and used Rust for the performance implementation. Go doesn't bring anything to the table anymore.
I used to write code by hand, now I just write prompts and manage the AI. There is some expertise involved but considerably less than before, and no doubt even that will vanish in the coming years.
For mathematicians the picture is even more bleak because their field is being strip mined and they face a future where there are perhaps no human reachable conjectures. Moreover if your job is to teach other mathematicians and nobody wants to become a mathematician... This is the future even if the technology hardly improves at all.
You don't need to know if there will be safe jobs in the future to avoid jobs that are unsafe today.
Personally if I were a teenager today I'd choose a career in medicine. You can still exercise your brain, but because it's practical and the fact that you have people's lives in your hands means that it's considerably less likely to be replaced by AI any time soon.