BigMuffin69

Strange, they didn't count the number of utils I get by voting for Kamala just to make these bastards mald

it was a rough week for me too! the wife and I have been battling covid, think we are through the worst of it though.

Morning lads, let's have a big week 💪

Also, choice sneer in the comments:

AlphaProof is more "AlphaZero doing self play against Lean" and less "Gemeni reading human proofs"

'manual translation' undoubtably doing some heavy lifting here

oh no

the wife sent this one to me

Azure/AWS/other cloud computing services that host these models are absolutely going to continue to make money hand over fist. But if the bottleneck is the infrastructure, then what's the point of paying an entire team of engineers 650K a year each to recreate a model that's qualitatively equivalent to an open-source model?

Yann and co. just dropped llama 3. Now there's an open source model on par with OAI and Anthropic, so who the hell is going to pay these nutjobs for access to their apis when people can get roughly the same quality for free without the risk of having to give your data to a 3rd party?

the removal of undesirable elements from society

Let me guess who gets to decide what qualifies as undesirable

Thanks for the info. I had never heard of this one before & didn't know I was shit posting on behalf of Thiel's ilk ;_;

Article summary:

A close look into the people and entities who helped draft and advocate for California’s controversial AI safety bill (SB 1047) reveals that one of the bill’s co-sponsors could have a significant conflict of interest Dan Hendrycks, an executive at Center for AI Safety — the firm whose lobbying arm helped draft the bill — co-founded a company called Gray Swan that offers AI safety compliance tools that seem positioned to provide the type of auditing data the bill would require; Gray Swan publicly launched on Tuesday The Center's lobbying arm was set up so it could help draft SB 1047 after state senator Scott Wiener approached the Center