Dont be a dick, people arent simping for Thiel just because they think the article you posted is over interpreting a single pause.

Starmer is no where near Blair 2.0, Blair at least had charisma, a political plan and, at least before Iraq, genuinly had mass grass roots support. Starmer has none of them, he’s an apolitical middle maneger who has been pushed to the top of the party by a right wing clique in labour as a way to purge the left.

Not easy to extract sure, but is it secure enough for you to claim that it hasnt been leaked and so forms a secure chain of custody? Once one has been leaked then that can be used to sign any fake pictures you like. I woudnt buy that for anything for serious than is this meme picture real.

In order for it to be traceable with a public key, it needs to be signed with the private key. That means the private key has to be on the camera. That means it can be extracted from the camera and leaked.

Sure it wouldnt be rational to care about DRM being broken a small amount allowing limited amount of copyright material to be copied.

What do you think their response would be?

No way they’d do that though, because then they’d have the mouse and the other members of the content mafia breathing down their necks.

It depends, if they’re use a transformer or diffusion based archetecture I think it would be fair to include it in the same “AI wave” thats been breaking since the release of chat gpt publicly.

Why would you bother mind controlling bees in order to make them do the thing they would be doing anyway?

97% sounds impressive, but thats equivalent to almost an hour of blackout every day. Developed societies demand +99.99% availability from their grids.

Civil cases of copyright infringment are not theft, no matter what the MPIA have trained you to believe.

We also didnt understand how the internet would change the world, still went ahead with it. We didnt understand how computers would change the world, still went ahead with it, we didnt understand how the steam engine would change the world… etc etc.

No one can know how a new invention will change things, but you are not going to be able to crush human’s innate creativity and drive to try new things. Sometimes those things are going to be a net negative and that’s bad, but the alternative is to insist nothing new is tried and thats A bad and B not possible.

People being economically displaced from innovation increasing productivity is good provided it happens at a reasonable pace and there is a sufficient social safety net to get those people back on their feet. Unfortunately those safety nets dont exist everywhere and have been under attack (in the west) for the past 40 years.

I don’t think that’s really a fair comparison, babies exist with images and sounds for over a year before they begin to learn language, so it would make sense that they begin to understand the world in non-linguistic terms and then apply language to that. LLMs only exist in relation to language so couldnt understand a concept separately to language, it would be like asking a person to conceptualise radio waves prior to having heard about them.

Probably, given that LLMs only exist in the domain of language, still interesting that they seem to have a “conceptual” systems that is commonly shared between languages.

Compared to a human who forms an abstract thought and then translates that thought into words. Which words I use has little to do with which other words I’ve used except to make sure I’m following the rules of grammar.

Interesting that…

Anthropic also found, among other things, that Claude “sometimes thinks in a conceptual space that is shared between languages, suggesting it has a kind of universal ‘language of thought’.”

Translations apps would be the main one for LLM tech, LLMs largely came out of google’s research into machine translation.

No you’re not going crazy, you just understand economics and trade more than the President of the USA.

I wouldnt trust the words of a Palantir exec if they said the sky was blue, but even accepting what they say, its just that the hamas attacks gave the ban impetus to move forwards. By his own words the ban already had bipartesan support and executive approval before that.

The headline that it was “about” Isreal rather than China is a massive reach.

Have they? Where?

Its a very difficult subject, both sides have merit. I can see the “CSAM created without abuse could be used in treatment/management of people with these horrible urges” but I can also see “Allowing people to create CSAM could normalise it and lead to more actual abuse”.

Sadly its incredibly difficult for academics to study this subject and see which of those two is more prevalent.