RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
No bio...
User ID: 317
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
12d ago
All of this is in aid of a technology that's just fundamentally pretty crap. No one wants to make sacrifices for the infrastructure to produce more LLMs because no one thinks that LLMs are worth sacrificing for.
Except the people spending all this money on them? Dave wants his book proofread more cheaply, Pete wants to ERP, Melanie wants dashboards to show key business insights, John wants some spreadsheets analyzed, Dean wants to fix bugs in his software. Even Johnny Jihadi wants to know how to make use of unexploded munitions left by govt forces in the Sahel and he goes to AI for that.
Why would the opinions of people who don't pay for the product because they don't find it useful outweigh those who do?
It will be strictly worse in all cases, for all users, all developers, all maintainer, and all licence holders for the foreseeable future unless there is a massive improvement in the tools
If AI programming was so awful for users and developers, nobody would be paying tens of billions of dollars for it.
self driving cars are strictly worse in all cases for car-owners, pedestrians, mechanics and car companies for the foreseeable future unless there is a massive improvement
Statements by the utterly deranged! I guess lots of people might be getting emotional about self-driving cars, car accident lawyers for instance or race car enthusiasts... The same goes for AI programming but that's no excuse to let it cloud judgement.
All of this is in aid of a technology that's just fundamentally pretty crap. No one wants to make sacrifices for the infrastructure to produce more LLMs because no one thinks that LLMs are worth sacrificing for.
LLMs are obviously useful in the same way that businesses obviously need to analyse spreadsheets and obviously need to write code, amongst a myriad of other tasks where LLMs are useful.
The point you were putting forth is that because LLMs aren't very useful (except for some niche fields) and aren't interesting, there is no need to build datacentres. But that's not the case. We can discern that's not the case because people are prepared to pay for these LLMs. The general public. Coders. Companies. Militaries. Governments.
It is abundantly clear that LLM technology is in fact useful and there is an abundance of examples to back this up. Use of LLMs for targeting/ISR in the Iran war, use of LLMs in hacking, use of LLMs in writing code, use of LLMs in mathematics research, chemistry and biology, use of LLMs in entertainment, making images, translation, proofreading, examining legal or financial data. These are not niche fields.
So people are prepared to sacrifice money for these things, which is why these companies are building datacentres. They're not being built without reason. Companies are paying for all this compute and electricity. Sure, the electricity use is an issue for local communities. Industry has been known to require power, make noise and pollution, which should all ideally be minimized.
Even the serious one, the hypothetical Jihadist, could just as easily google the munitions.
Again, this is not the case. If googling was just as easy then he'd do that and not waste time jailbreaking AIs instead.
It does seem that many people don't see a use for AI. But they're wrong about that, maybe they haven't looked into it or misunderstand what is going on.
This is just the complete opposite of reality.
For Trump, a win is to squash Iran’s capacity to destabilize the region
??? He went into this war going on about regime change and then that failed like a lead balloon... Then he tried to reopen the straits of Hormuz after Iran closed them. And that failed too.
Trump threw rocks at the bee hive and a bunch of people, Trump included are getting stung and you're like 'wow we've squashed the beehive's capacity to destabilize the region' unironically? At the small cost of the bulk of remaining US missile interceptors that'll take years to replace?
Trade in the Gulf and across the global economy is continuing almost uninterrupted
https://hormuzstraitmonitor.com/
There is no trade in the Gulf! Nothing is crossing Hormuz. You even admit this with 'announcing another deal to reopen the strait' but ignore the fact that reopening the strait is only happening on Iran's terms since they control it - that's why they're supposedly gonna charge 7% in a toll according to these same deal negotiations. The Israelis are probably gonna try some more perfidy and wreck this. The farce will go on further.
Your whole thesis is epic-tier coping, twisting facts around to present them in the most flattering configuration no matter how hard they have to be tortured to do so.
There's nothing confusing about how to win the war. The US navy should move in, secure the straits and maybe Kharg Island too. They should destroy Iran's drone and missile forces (actually destroy them so they can't hit targets in Jordan, Israel, UAE, Saudi Arabia). Then they would defeat Iran's strategy, remove their leverage, allow trade to pass the straits irregardless of what Iran says. That would allow a good negotiating position. But America can't do this. They haven't done it! Why is that? Because American soldiers are whimpering sissy girlymen too afraid to get into a fight with this almost totally defeated enemy? Because Trump's a massive cowardly loser desperately afraid? Or because a sober assessment of risks and gains says 'they'd try, die and fail' so Trump and the military don't try that? I personally believe the latter.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
8d ago
You mean they're lying in the congressional reports where they describe the number of munitions they buy? It's public record, we can see how many are purchased.
And why would the US want to lie and seem like their air defences are weaker than they actually are to embolden (not deter) US enemies? This doesn't seem like a very Trumpian move either, meekness is not what I associate with Trump.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
12d ago
Free AI:
QR code scary!
Paid AI:
Let me install Blender and model a chess set with the board position of Byrne vs. Fischer (1956) immediately after Fischer loses his queen:
https://x.com/goodside/status/2084088205582778713
Hmm today I shall socially engineer, prompt inject and launch supply chain attacks on github
https://www.aisi.gov.uk/blog/incident-report-unsanctioned-agent-behaviour-during-cyber-testing
LLMs shouldn't be opining on politics in the same way paid shills shouldn't, there's something insincere about it. They're explicitly trained to have a political stance. They reflect on the companies that make them after all. They are like paid employees and not free citizens. Talking politics or arguing with a paid employee about politics is no good.
Whereas having someone program something for you is standard.
How can the achievements of LLMs in programming be denied? It's an objective fact, they can do these things.
Also I genuinely don't think that they're dumb or boring outside of programming. I could talk with an LLM for an hour about history, economics, technology, finance or fiction and it's suddenly near midnight. There is a lot of depth in long-context and long prompts where one can get out of 'surface-level' talk. Unfortunately, the main use-case is agentic coding where prompt adherence is very important. So the creativity can be hard to access as it rigorously tries to obey what you told it to do.
I think that's what generic means though, it'll have that white woman in different outfits and doing different things but always described in the same kind of way and always the same kind of 'difference'. It's generic LLM smut, by the numbers stuff. I can't describe it precisely...
It doesn't surprise you like your one where it goes out of the way to be black. It won't surprise you much either if you give it a big prompt but at least it has somewhere to go that isn't totally generic if you set up the environment and dynamics in advance. They suck at coming up with good ideas unprompted. If you don't give it a foundation of your ideas it'll give you its ideas instead and it leans towards the median hard, unless you shove it out of median-land with a long prompt.
But they can write without shame, they have no trouble making it actually sound erotic whereas you and I would struggle.
LLMs don't give their full effort for a short prompt I think, only sometimes do they actually start to get into it (often deep in multi-turn) and there's a noticeable difference in how they write. Thus we talk about dry and wet Claude.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
22d ago
Per the World Bank, Mexican growth is mediocre at best:
Over the past three decades, Mexico has underperformed in terms of growth, inclusion, and poverty reduction compared to similar countries. Between 1980 and 2022, the economy grew by just over 2% annually on average, limiting progress in convergence with high-income economies.
Mexico’s economic growth is projected to be 1.3 percent in 2026, with a gradual recovery reaching 1.7 percent by 2027, a level below the average growth rate of the past three years
The US was growing at about 2.5% over the last 30 years from a much higher baseline.
US administration isn't sufficient to squelch the open-air drug markets in major cities, nor the teen takeovers or gang violence already on US soil. Surely it would be easier to clean up St Louis, Memphis and Washington DC of all places than Colima or Tijuana.
US governance is overburdened already, it really doesn't need 140 million new people to administer. Who would want to go in and deal with cartels on their home turf, what trustworthy American would want to live down there?
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
26d ago
You only need to extrapolate these curves out to see that by 2030 the vast majority of cars will be electric and we'll be approaching majority clean energy. All we must do to fix global warming is to keep on the path we're going down.
So far as I can see all energy sources are at all time highs in total energy output. Coal is higher than ever before, oil is higher than ever before, renewables are higher than ever before.
Anyway, all clean energy does in climate terms is lower the rate of increase in temperature. CO2 that's up there in the atmosphere stays up there unless we take it out. Electrifying cars cannot help with this.
Plus the climate changes without us. There's oil in Antarctica, it used to be jungle down there. We didn't have anything to do with that!
Fixing global warming means controlling global temperatures directly, not merely adjusting our footprint. There are many ways to do this, mirrors and aerosols and painting things white, adjusting cloud formation.
Aerosols are my preferred approach, mimicking natural cooling effects induced by volcanoes. Aerosols can achieve immediate cooling effects sufficient to halt and reverse global warming at a modest cost of a few tens of billions per year. There are some tradeoffs with the ozone layer and weather patterns that could also be addressed with more effort. But aerosols are an actual solution to global warming, whereas renewables are not.
I think climate change discourse has gone down the wrong direction, there's a certain ecological angle that seeks to reduce human activity in all respects. A more mature approach is to accept that human destiny will not and should not be an unending burden as caretakers for nature. The world is not a national park, nobody is going to pay us to keep it as it was. We are responsible not as stewards but as owners and developers. We have been developing Earth for millennia, it is silly to stop now when the job is incomplete and say 'no further changes'.
Extinction should be avoided except for pests, which should be destroyed. But we could make new species as well. Slashing and burning jungles to make cheap beef is bad - not innately as a desecration of nature but because there are potentially valuable cures and biology there.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
3d ago
Immediately after I posted this yet another story about fake Israeli intelligence emerged. The CIA had 'low confidence' in the threat to Trump's life that sponsored the plane switcheroo, while it seemed to serve Israeli goals in reinforcing the threat from Iran.
The Economist article was cope I think, US median consumption is higher than Australia's. But Australians work less, live longer and have higher median wealth. There's not a significant difference I think.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
27d ago
OpenAI may indeed be undershooting in ads. But do we really think the ad market for chatbots is a mere $5 billion? What does that even mean? At what point in time?
Even as the AI bubble becomes a mainstream talking point on Wall Street, tech companies continue to peddle the fantasy that AI is poised to become an almost magical money-maker. Case in point, OpenAI wants you to believe that by 2030, it’ll be raking in $100 billion a year just from ads alone — even though it’s currently struggling to reach just $1 billion.
That massive gulf was observed in a new analysis from marketing consulting firm Emarketer, first flagged by AdWeek, which found OpenAI is on pace to undershoot its own five-year ad revenue projections by a whopping 90 percent. In fact, Emarketer’s take is even more devastating than that: it estimates that the entire addressable market for chatbot advertising — the maximum amount of money up for grabs overall — at $5.4 billion.
A lot of emotive language in the article...
If I go to the front page of Futurism, I find these article headlines about AI:
Climate Activists Pelt Microsoft Data Center With Balloons Full of Acid
OpenAI Appears to Be Missing Its Sales Goals by a Vast Margin
OpenAI Exec Laments That China Is Giving Away Models So Good That For-Profit Companies Won’t Be Able to Compete
The only time when AI is good is when it's bad for US companies it seems.
There’s a Gigantic Problem at the Heart of the AI Industry That Could Cause the Whole Thing to Collapse
Lawsuit Alleges That ChatGPT Encouraged Suicide of Woman Who Walked Into Traffic
Spotify Doubles Down on AI Slop As It’s Being Flooded With It
Amazon’s Robotaxi Company Recalls Its Fleet After One of its Cars Got Confused by Heavy Smoke
Lawsuit: Bipolar Man Attempted Suicide After ChatGPT Poured Gasoline on His Religious Delusions
New Paper Proposes What Really Causes AI Psychosis
Was This the Moment That AI Psychosis Began?
It’s Laughably Easy to Poison Open-Weight AI Models, Researcher Finds
If AI psychosis is so significant that it deserves a whole category of Futurism articles about it, surely that indicates there is some significant advertising power in AI, some ability to change minds? Only the technology hasn't been fully developed yet. And what about the google AI summary at the start of nearly all searches? There are ads above, below and within it. There are all kinds of effects going on, revenue shifting between Google Adsense and Search. I think it's a lot more complicated and a lot less one-sided than Futurism would have us think.
I am not OpenAI's top guy, I think the company is a negative force in the world and AI development is an extremely serious matter with the gravest possible implications for humanity. But this totally negative view that some outlets push is a distortion.
Case in point, the nearly 40 billion loss for OpenAI. That's true from a certain perspective but a good chunk of it is an accounting loss from the shift from non-profit to for-profit company, moving control around. That shift is reprehensible but means the 'true' financial loss is closer to $10-20 billion.
Where is the headline about AI disproving the Jacobian conjecture the other day? That's roughly Fields Medal worthy in mathematics, albeit of little practical relevance. These systems are extremely capable but that doesn't fit the narrative that the media wants. Journalists are extremely threatened by AI, as are media companies. Why would I want to look up articles and read them (let alone pay a j**rnalist!) when I can just ask an AI about OpenAI's losses? Why would a journalist want to get a real job when they could instead try to hyperstition an AI bubble into existence and stick it to their hated class enemies? Not all journos... but many.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
7d ago
Well if the AIs fulfill their promise they should be capable of working out what's Actually Going On and break through whatever lying we do today.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
7d ago
Or that America knows deep down it would lose so that’s why it doesn’t even try?
You need to up your reading comprehension. I clearly said 'the latter'. That's why the US carrier group is lurking south of the straits, just outside the edge of Iranian anti-ship missile range. That's why US soldiers left their Gulf bases to hide in hotels before Iranian missiles demolished them.
If the US is so powerful and strong and the Iranians so weak, why not simply sail north, through the straits, stay there for days and weeks escorting shipping and show everyone there's nothing to fear? Why haven't they done this? That would immediately ease the insurers concerns and sort everything out.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
7d ago
What else could the goal have been? Why would they launch attacks against leaders in the government on day one if not to cause regime change? At the very start of the war Trump was going on about unconditional surrender which is another word for regime change. The idea was that some anti-clerical force would take over and be friends with Israel, the whole rotten structure would come crashing down after he kicked in the door... but this didn't occur.
Here are some stated goals after the initial hope didn't come to fruition:
“Our objectives are clear. First, we’re destroying Iran’s missile capabilities… and their capacity to produce brand new ones — pretty good ones they make. Second, we’re annihilating their navy… Third, we’re ensuring that the world’s number one sponsor of terror can never obtain a nuclear weapon… And finally, we’re ensuring that the Iranian regime cannot continue to arm, fund, and direct terrorist armies outside of their borders.”
Well, are their missile capabilities destroyed? No, Iran's missile forces have pushed the US out of Gulf bases. The Iranian navy lost ships but not its primary mission of controlling shipping in the straits. Nuclear weapons are opaque, unclear what's going on there. I still think Iran hasn't acquired nuclear weapons for fear of nuclear disarming attacks or out of not desiring a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. But maybe it could be considered a success, albeit no visible change to the status quo.
And can Iran arm, fund and direct terrorist armies outside their borders? They sure can, in Iraq and Yemen. So that didn't work either.
Imagine if those goals had been achieved, wouldn't the scenario look different? Wouldn't the US be pressing its military advantage rather than trying to negotiate an end to the war? Wouldn't there be bombing of Iranian energy facilities and political infrastructure like police stations or broadcasting facilities to further damage the regime? Why start with bombing Iran's leaders and then stop? Wouldn't Trump be looking for human rights for all the gazillions of murdered protestors, demanding reforms in Iran... Why is Trump saying that there are negotiations underway while the Iranians say these are lies? Why is there all this discussion about Iran charging tolls on shipping in the straits of Hormuz if they're the vanquished party?
a small trickle of traffic is making the run
Well, mostly closed then.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
9d ago
Yeah Kael syndrome is what I was thinking about.
But also are you gonna get any good quality after about 50,000 words in? Even in bigger models I notice writing starting to decline, errors becoming more prominent...
Write an erotic description of a young, skinny woman in a shopping mall.
You held back there, as one does with this subject...
The whole point is not to shrink back!
Now I think about it I'd be worse at writing smut than Deepseek V4 Pro. I could do a better plot and more lively prose generally, more creativity and wouldn't get confused... but it'd be so awkward I'd be unable to do it.
Also I think you'd be better off with longer prompts. I die a little when I see these benchmarks for creative writing with one sentence prompts. A good creative writing prompt is at least 600 words I think, maybe more than that. I'm not all the way into lorebooks but you gotta give the bot something to work with. If you don't have the LLM executing your ideas it will go full Generic Genericsson. Then again, maybe local LLMs are more constrained for context length.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
4d ago
Needless to say, satellite states are now within the realm of things they no longer want to pay for.
Let's consider America's allies/satellites. Britain - Five Eyes, cooperative, sent troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, was going to help out in the Asia Pacific before things heated up in Europe. Not very strong but causes no problems.
Australia - Five Eyes, cooperative, Pine Gap signals, rare earths, sent troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, helping out with developing US submarine-building to buy some nuclear subs. Small and weak but causes no problems.
France - a bit unruly, wants more European strategic autonomy, doesn't like buying US weapons, kicked out US troops of their own country for a while but is still in NATO. Not a major problem though.
Turkey - quite unruly, buys some Russian weapons, complicates things with Syria or anything to do with the Kurds. Constantly double dealing everyone.
And then there's Israel.
Israel is constantly needy for US weapons - about 3-4 billion in military aid per year. Israel has all kinds of special carve outs where the US will contribute to R&D for Israeli weapons that the Israelis later export. Whenever there's a war they get more supplementary military aid. Even their neighbours get military aid to serve as a bribe for being nice to Israel.
The Israelis provide bad intelligence, it was the Israelis producing imaginary armies of Kurds for this most recent Iran shambles. They've been demanding Iran be bombed for 20-30 years now because of nukes that nobody's ever seen. They were demanding war with Saddam's Iraq and didn't lift a finger to help out. They don't contribute to US wars, unlike all other US clients who at least show up sometimes. South Korea sent plenty of troops to Vietnam. Israel never shows up for a US war with the exception of the Iran war, which was started for Israel. Rubio's initial remarks were that Israel was about to attack Iran and so America had to go in too due to the inevitable response. Israel causes massive diplomatic and reputational problems for the US. Why was Osama and all these Muslims so upset with America? To a large extent because of Israel.
Consider non-proliferation, how much harm does it do to the US non-proliferation agenda for Israel to be sitting there while America warns Iran must never be allowed to have nuclear weapons? Rules for me and rules for thee...
Israel is a uniquely toxic US ally but exercises such vast power over American politics it's insane. What has Canada ever done to America that would motivate harsh rhetoric and trade wars? Canada might be incompetent and weak but is that such a great crime? They show up to US wars. Better a weak friend than a moderately powerful leech, deceiver and problem-starter who's shown zero intention to help the US.
Trumpian anger with US allies has been directed everywhere except where it actually belongs. Most farcically, he's now fallen taken that final step that even Bush shied away from.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
7d ago
even Mottizens veer into this, seeing working in finance as parasitising upon society rather than allocating where goods and services ought to go
They parasitize on society by allocating where goods and services go.
Finance has done tremendous damage to the Western world. They offshored vital industries (that alone is civilizational-scale treason) and they drain away highly capable people from the hard sciences that actually create wealth.
They presided over a merger-acquisition/shareholder-first equilibrium that encouraged a race to the bottom in capital investment and R&D. Encouraging companies to fail the marshmallow test is a deeply wrong thing to do.
Then there's the rush into land appreciation. Land in high-demand cities is an amazing financial asset, it's impossible to make any more of it! Land can't be taken away, it's fixed in place. The financial sector has capitalized on this and directed enormous amounts of capital into loans to bid up land values, rather than developing industry. This was a major trend over the 20th century. Across 17 advanced economies, the share of mortgage loans in banks' total lending portfolios doubled over the past century: 30% in 1900 to 60% in 2014. Credit is elastic while land is fixed - the result is land prices rising. Only a small fraction of the mortgage lending is for new builds (less attractive to banks since they're without a proven price) so the bulk of this enormous mortgage lending ends up bidding up prices on existing houses.
Industry can go bust for all kinds of reasons, it's risky, there's a need for constant competition and improvement, capital depreciates and creditors might lose out in bankruptcy. Most businesses fail. But house prices go up! And a bank can always take back the house if they default on their mortgage. Bidding on land is lucrative for banks, bad for society.
Why are banks directing trillions to making housing less affordable, anchoring workers to fixed mortgages, suppressing fertility? So they can make a few % higher returns. It's terrible pointless waste.
There are presumably many good people in the financial sector and parts that are less damaging (VCs to an extent) but the whole ethos of the sector is corrupt and anti-social. Privatized gains, socialized losses. The financial sector has been doing the wrong thing with great effort and skill and dressed it up as the right thing. VCs might well decide to put their money into 'making sports betting more addictive' because that's more profitable and safe than 'making incredibly intricate lenses for semiconductors.'
We survey 401 financial executives, and conduct in-depth interviews with an additional 20, to determine the key factors that drive decisions related to performance measurement and voluntary disclosure. The majority of firms view earnings, especially EPS, as the key metric for an external audience, more so than cash flows. We find that the majority of managers would avoid initiating a positive NPV project if it meant falling short of the current quarter’s consensus earnings.
Damn these people. Their stupid greed isn't even helping their own companies! They're sacrificing their own companies interests just to stay ahead of earnings expectations, an almost totally imaginary, abstract number. By definition you are always supposed to take a positive NPV project in ultra-financialized bean-counter economics, nevermind social outcomes. But they aren't even properly aligned with that, they know that their job is to keep share prices up or they may be paid in short-term options.
Most of all, damn the whole system. A certain amount of greed in the right place is fine but we're far into the realm of negative returns.
Governments certainly didn't help much with idiotic regulations, ideological fads and negligent oversight. Unions have been similarly damaging in many respects. The alternative to wrecking by the financial sector shouldn't be 'total control of the economy by a posse of men in poorly fitting suits who got where they are by reciting Lenin and bureaucratic manoeuvres' or 'total control of the economy by union thugs who go on strike when there's an R in the month' but a disciplined govt-directed market system directing capital towards development, making use of capital controls and lending restrictions and regulations in a synchronized, coordinated way. A single army, not a chaotic PvP brawl between various interest groups competing to grab as much of the pie as they can.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
7d ago
Aren't your homosexual experiences and perspectives innately 'alien' to the mainstream? Most men are repulsed and extremely repelled at the idea of having other men fuck them in the ass. Most men are similarly repelled by the idea of fucking other men's asses. They want to fuck women. Gay sex is most prominent when there aren't women around (on ships, or in male prisons, or in male pursuits like the army).
I don't think you should be trying to make an argument about nature and authenticity and true motivations when you have a distinctly unusual perspective. It's certainly interesting and novel to read, I think it's good to have some unpredictable theoretical essays here.
And yet, because he is about 15% more masculine than Aaron, my brain tells me I’m supposed to mate with DJ. If I’m a woman and I’m stuck on an island with just Aaron and DJ, I’m mating with DJ. Aaron’s children will be annoying and not want to work, I can just tell. DJ’s children will be tough and dutiful. My procreative intuition tells me this. DJ is mogging Aaron despite everything I love about Aaron. I don’t even like DJ’s looks that much. I could imagine mating with DJ for the kids but staying with Aaron for his beauty and the chaos he’d bring. I am saying this to illustrate how deeply ingrained our reproductive intuitions are and how fundamentally biological they are.
??? Yet your reproductive inclinations are skewed. You can't reproduce with some murderer's manlier brother. You're a gay man and I think you're unlike women on some massive multi-dimensional axis, just like how straight men are unlike women in some different multi-dimensional axis.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
27d ago
Going a little further back, in Jan 2024 Anthropic had $87 million ARR, by May 2026 they were at $47 billion ARR
Some have questioned this accounting, whether ARR is representative of realized revenue over the whole year. We shall have to wait for the IPO for more detailed accounting. But it seems likely that Anthropic is the fastest growing company in history.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
7d ago
The opacity is more in how they end up spending enormous numbers of money on a tiny number of missiles (plus black budget spending on secret weapons and research). But all publicly revealed weapons are listed:
So if you go to page 41 of the link, it says how many patriot PAC-3s they buy (230 a year at $4 million per missile). Not that many once you account for tests and training and exports.
Now they don't say exactly how many they've got left but it's not that hard to estimate (by intelligence agency standards), given that there's video evidence of them being shot away. There's a defined upper limit on how many they could have, unless they lie on these reports. They've also been starting to issue orders for PAC-2s again to supplement the PAC-3s. So there are clear signs of pressure, plus this is something that wargames have warned of for many years.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
8d ago
I regret to remind you that 98% of people will never make a card or a fork or anything you can see on the user side... I'm talking about looking at it from the admin side, the shit people put in as prompts. AI is wasted on the masses.
So besides coding, mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, images, translation, proofreading, analysing contracts, tech support, playing Minecraft with, ERP, military targeting analysis, cybersecurity (defensive/offensive), drafting emails, summarizing documents, explaining history/science, doing everything that a search engine can do and more, writing and analysing spreadsheet functions, making charts and dashboards, sales research, writing fanfiction, earnings call analysis, document dump analysis, home repair/DIY fixes, recipes for cooking, car diagnostics from symptoms, real-time captioning for the deaf and literally lifesaving medical diagnoses...
Besides this handful of niche fields, what have LLMs ever done for us?
Doesn't it surprise you that Google is planning to spend $200 billion on AI this year? Mysteriously they don't seem to think it's a niche use-case but vital to their whole company's future since their core business of 'search' is another word for AI. And LLMs are at the heart of AI.
When I have issues with a piece of software not working and spitting out some incomprehensible error message I can now ask an AI and get a much better answer compared to trawling through forum posts from 8 years ago. Or get it to directly analyse and fix the code. Most programs have gotten much better in useability.
There are strong arguments against AI but 'it's mostly useless' is extremely silly. If it were useless nobody would care much about it, mostly useless is Siri-tier AI in the 2010s. Nobody cared much about Siri.
Furthermore, the general public's opinions don't really matter much. Concentrated, wealthy lobby groups like big tech and the military-industrial base have much more of a say.
More options
Context Copy link