Have you coded with Claude Sonnet 3.5 yet? It is mind-blowingly better than Opus 3, which was already noticeably better than anything openAI has put out yet. Gpt 4 was nice to code with, but this is on a whole other level. I can't imagine what Opus 3.5 will be able to do.
That's really interesting. For android studio it's been absolutely crushing it for me. It's taken some getting used to, but I've had it build an app with about 60 files. I'm no master programmer, but I've been a hobbyist for a couple decades. What it's done in the last 5 days for me would have taken me 2 months easy, and there's lots of extra touches that I probably wouldn't have taken time to do if it wasn't as simple as loading in a few files and telling it what I want.
Usually when I work on something like this, my todo list grows much faster than my ability to actually put it together, but with this project I'm quickly running out of even any features that I can imagine. I've not had any of the issues of it running in circles like I would often get it gpt4.
Yeah. It's really interesting because juniors and hobbyist are the ones getting used to how to interact with it. Since it is rapidly improving, it won't be long until it will outpace the grunt work ability of seniors and the new seniors will be the ones willing and able to use it. Programming is switching away from being able to write tedious code and into being able to come up with ideas and convey them clearly to an llm. There's going to be a real leveling of the playing field when even the best seniors won't have any use for most of their grunt work coding skills. The jump up from Opus 3 to Sonnet 3.5 is absolutely insane, and Opus 3.5 should be here before too long.
It takes a lot of energy to train the models in the first place, but very little once you have them. I run mixture of agents on my laptop, and it outperforms anything openai has released on pretty much every benchmark, maybe even every benchmark. I run it quite a bit and have noticed no change in my electricity bill. I imagine inference on gpt4 must almost be very efficient, if not, they should just switch to piping people open sourced llms run through MoA.
My dude, no, I'm not the creator, settle down. Mixture of agents is free and open to anyone to use. Here is a demo of it by Matthew Berman. It isnt hard to set up.
How stupid do you have to be to believe that only 8% of companies have seen failed AI projects? We can't manage this consistently with CRUD apps and people think that this number isn't laughable? Some companies have seen benefits during the LLM craze, but not 92% of them. 34% of companies report that generative AI specifically...
I don't know how much stock to put in this author. They can't even read the chart that they shared. They saw that 8% didn't get use from gen ai and so assumed that 92% did. There are also 7% that haven't tried using it yet. Ironically, pretty much any LLM with vision would have done a better job of comprehending the chart than this author did.
Yeah, this paper is time wasted. It is hilarious that they think that 3 years is a long time as a data scientists and this somehow gives them such wisdom. Then, they can't even accurately extract the data from the chart that they posted in the article. On top of all this, like you pointed out, they can't even keep a clear narrative, and they blatantly contradict themself on their main point. They want to pile drive people who come to the same conclusion as themself. What a strange take.
Yes, and then you take the time to dig a little deeper and use something agent based like aider or crewai or autogen. It is amazing how many people are stuck in the mindset of "if the simplest tools from over a year aren't very good, then there's no way there are any good tools now."
It's like seeing the original Planet of the Apes and then arguing against how realistic the Apes are in the new movies without ever seeing them. Sure, you can convince people who really want unrealistic Apes to be the reality, and people who only saw the original, but you'll do nothing for anyone who actually saw the new movies.
It blatantly contradicts itself. I would wager good money that you read the headline and didn't go much further because you assumed it was agreeing with you. Despite the subject matter, this is objectively horribly written. It lacks a cohesive narrative.
There is literally not a chance that anyone downvoting this actually read it. It's just a bunch of idiots that read the title, like the idea that llms suck and so they downvoted. This paper is absolute nonsense that doesn't even attempt to make a point. I seriously think it is ppprly ai generated and just taking the piss out of idiots that love anything they think is anti-ai, whatever that means.
Yeah, this is exactly what I think it is. I'm a bit concerned about how hard it's going to hit a large number of people when they realize that they're echo chamber of "LLMs are garbage and have no benefits" was so completely wrong. I agree that there are scary aspects of all this, but pretending like they don't exist will just make it harder to deal with. It's like denying that the smoke alarm is going off until your arm is on fire.
What a good full set of possibilities since it's certainly impossible for anyone on the internet to lie. How fun for a blog to contradict its main point.
Because the headline goes along with all the people that thoughtlessly think ai is pointless, but the blog post itself is an incoherent mess that actually sometimes talks about how ai is useful and rapidly improving. It is a rambling mess. People who read it realise this. People who just read the headline assume it will say what they think. The chances that you made it through that whole thing are slim to none, but sure, maybe you read it, whatever. Congratulations, I'm sure it really improved your understanding.
Other than having to scroll down an extra 3 centimeters to see your Google results, have you actually been inconvenienced by ai being used somewhere? All this outrageous about terrible ai getting in the way all the time is hilarious because it is absolutely manufactured by people who are obsessed with complaining and then parroted by people incapable of thinking for themselves. Nobody's actually living worse lives because a few companies are trying out new tech. The fact of the matter is that there are obnoxious karens online, just like in real life.
You seem like someone who is probably self-righteous, obnoxious, and annoying to be around in real life, just like you are online.
I agree that it doesn't look fun, and it absolutely seems stupid, and on top of that, a massive waste of money. That all said, it sure seems like an incredible experience to have, and I would love to know what it feels like to make my way to that peak.
The research from Purdue University, first spotted by news outlet Futurism, was presented earlier this month at the Computer-Human Interaction Conference in Hawaii and looked at 517 programming questions on Stack Overflow that were then fed to ChatGPT....
There is a good chance that it is instrumental in discoveries that lead to efficient clean energy. It's not as if we were at some super clean, unabused planet before language models came along. We have needed help for quite some time. Almost nobody wants to change their own habits(meat, cars, planes, constant AC and heat...), so we need something. Maybe AI will help in this endevour like it has at so many other things.
Yeah, because no human would convincingly lie on the internet. Right, Arthur?
It's literally built on what confidently incorrect people put on the internet. The only difference is that there are constant disclaimers on it saying it may give incorrect information.
Anyone too stupid to understand how to use it is too stupid to use the internet safely anyways. Or even books for that matter.
This is a common misunderstanding of what it means to discover new things. New things are just remixing old things. For example, AI has discovered new matrix multiplications, protein foldings, drugs, chess/go/poker strategies, and much more that are all far superior to anything humans have ever come up with in these fields. In all these cases, the AI was just combining old things in new ways. Even Einstein was just combining old things into new ways. There is exactly zero chance that AI will all of a sudden quit making new discoveries all of a sudden.
We are running these things on computers not designed for this. Right now, there are ASICs being built that are specifically designed for it, and traditionally, ASICs give about 5 orders of magnitude of efficiency gains.
Yesterday, someone posted a doctored one on here saying everyone eats it up even if you use a ridiculous font in your poorly doctored photo. People who want to believe are quite easy to fool.
Yeah, that's the nature of discovery. Humans also "discovery" tons of things like chess strategies that are complete nonsense. Over time, we discard the most nonsense ones and keep the good ones as best as we can. It just turns out that this process is done way faster and efficiently by machines. That's why nobody thinks humans are going to surpass AI at chess, go, poker, protein folding, matrix multiplation algorithm creation, and a whole bunch of other things.
Google is a search engine. It points you to web pages that are made by people. Many times, the people who make those websites have put things on them that are knowingly or unknowingly incorrect but said in an authoritative manner. That was all I was saying, nothing controversial. That's been a known fact for a long time. You can't just read something on a single site and then be sure that it has to be true. I get that there are people who strangely fall in love with specific websites and think they are absolute truth, but thats always been a foolish way to use the internet.
A great example of people believing blindly is all these horribly doctored google ai images saying ridiculous things. There are so many idiots that think every time they see a screenshot of Google ai saying something absurd that it has to be true. People have even gone so far as to use ridiculous fonts just to point out how easy it is to get people to trust anything. Now there's a bunch of idiots that think all 20 or so Google ai mistakes they've seen are all genuine, so much so that they think almost all Google ai responses are incorrect. Some people are very stupid. Sorry to break it to you, but LLMs are not the first thing to put incorrect information on the internet.
I didn't say LLMs made these discoveries. They didn't. AI made those discoveries. Yes, it is true that humans made AI, so in a way, humans made the discoveries, but if that is your take, then it is impossible for AI to ever make any discovery. Really, if we take this way of thinking to its natural conclusion, then even humans can never make discoveries, only the universe can make discoveries, since humans are a result of the universe "universing". It is arbitrary to try to credit humans with anything that happens further down their evolution.
Humans tried for a long time to get good at chess, and AI came along and made the absolute best chess players utterly irrelevant even if we give a team of the worlds best chessplayers an endless clock and thr AI a single minute for the entire game. That was 20 years ago. This is happening in more and more fields and showing no sign of stopping. We don't know yet if discoveries will come from future LLMs like theybm have from other forms of AI, but we do know that with each generation more and more complex patterns are being identified and utilized by LLMs. 3 years ago the best LLMs would have scored single digits on IQ test, now they are triple digits, it is laughable to think that anyone knows where the current rapid trajectory will stop for this new technology, and much more laughable to think we are already at the end.
if this is your take, then lot of keyboard made a lot of discovery.
This is literally my point. It is arbitrary to choose that all the good ideas came from "humans". If we are going to give all credit for anything AI produces to humans, then it only seems fair to give all credit for human things to our common ancestors with chimpanzees, because if it were not for their clever ideas, we would never have been here. But wait, we can't stop there, because we have to give credit to the original single-celled life forms, and eventually, back to the universe itself(like I mentioned before).
Look, I totally get the desire to want to glorify humans and think that we have something special that machines don't/can't have. It kinda sucks to think that we are not so special, and potentially extememly inferior to what is right around the corner. We can't let that primal ego desire cloud our judgement, though. Our brains are physical machines doing calculations. There is not some magical difference between our calculations that make it so we can make discoveries and machines cannot.
Imagine you teach your little brother how to play chess, and then your brother thinks about it a bunch and comes up with a bunch of new strategies and starts to kick your butt every time, and eventually atatts crushing tournaments. Sure, you can cling to the fact that you taught him how to play, and you can go around telling everyone how "you" are winning all these tournaments because your brother is actually winning them, but it doesn't change the fact that your brother is the one with the secret sauce that you simply are unable to comprehend.
Your whole point is that if people do it, then it is some special discovery thing, but if computers do it, then it is just computational brute force. There is actually no difference between the two, it is just two different ways of wording the same process. We made programs that could understand the rules, and then it went further and in the same direction that we were trying to go.
So far as continuing indefinitely because we are on a trajectory goes, sure, we will eventually hit some intelligence plateaus, but we are nowhere near this point. Why can I say this with such certainty? Because we have things that we know will work that we haven't gotten around to combining yet. Some of this gets a bit technical, but a nice way to think of it is this. Right now, we are mainly using hardware designed to generate general graphics that we have hijacked to use for machine learning. The usual speedup when we go from using generalized hardware to specialized is about 5 orders of magnitude(10,000x). That kind of a gain has huge implications in the AI/ML world. This is just one out of many known improvements on the horizon, but it is one of the simplest to wrap your head around. I don't know how familiar you are with things like crewAI or autogen, but they are phenomenal, they absolutely crush all of the greatest base LLMs, but they are still a bit slow due to how many LLM calls they take. When we have a 10,000x speedup(which is pretty much guarenteed), then everyone will be able to instantly use enormous agent frameworks like this in an instant.
I understand wanting to see humans as having a monopoly on "intelligence", but quite frankly that era is coming to an end. It may be a bumpy ride, but the sooner humans learn to adjust to this new world, the better. I don't think it is something that someone can really make someone else see, but once you do see it, it is very obvious. I suggest you check out the cutting-edge agent stuff out there and then imagine that the most impressive stuff will be routinely done from a single prompt in an instant. Then, on top of that, consider that the base LLMs that we have now are the worst there will ever be. We are in for a very wild ride.
Interesting, I guess they managed to scrub the web pretty well, I can't find any mention of a specialized ai chip. It would be quite a feat to be able to produce something like that for such a low price.
It's such a first-world thing to not understand all the good that crypto has done. There are countless lives that have been financially saved by having a safe place to hold wealth while their countries' fiat collapsed. It's just a short matter of time until many first world folks understand this as well.
Nobody has to have control of the production of money, it is especially bad when corrupt people have the power to generate it into their pockets. I know it is hard to understand how generating money for one's self is theft from everyone with money, but it is the case, you just have to try a bit harder to wrap your head around it.
If you were not living in a powerful first world country, you would like it a hell of a lot more. It is such a luxury to not have to constantly be worried about your currency collapsing. In places like Turkiye, crypto is massively popular because their currency is constantly devaluing. There are many countries like this that many Americans and Europeans seem to forget even exist.
It probably won't be too long until even the spoiled nations will want to be able to hold value somewhere that isn't free falling as well. The US is now paying more to service their debt than they are to the military. Not everyone can afford to hold their wealth in real estate and successful businesses.
Yeah, probably, don't worry about it, it's all a bit complex so probably all just the same thing, who knows. No way to tell really. You'll be fine without digging too deep into this stuff, it's difficult to understand.
Read my comment again, you entirely missed the point. This has nothing to do with anything you pointed out. I guarantee you don't live In a poor country because there isn't a chance that you would have no idea how much they are benefiting from bitcoin. I'm sorry you're so offended, but you were your ignorance so prominently that it isn't hard to see at all. I'm also in the 1st world, but I desire to understand the whole picture enough to be able to tell. Use your anger over something you know nothing about as a guide of where to educate yourself.
Oh my. Hold your horses buddy. Nobody is forcing poor people to buy bitcoin. People are just faced with a choice, they can hold their value in fiat currencies that corrupt governments are printing like crazy, or they hold their value in a decentralized currency that nobody has control over and nobody can print on a whim. Just because you feel like you missed out on a good investment and so you are bitter towards an entire growing industry doesn't matter at all to people who are using it to escape corruption.
It really isn't nearly as complex or evil as you think it is. It really is just a way for people who have repeatedly been screwed over by corrupt politicians to escape corruption. It's just a matter of time until more and more people around you realize the same, and eventually you will join in, albeit a bit late due to your ignorant bitterness. You do yourself no favors by being against something simply because you don't take the time to understand it.
Poor people all over the world are less poor because they have used bitcoin to escape predatory devaluing fiat currencies. Go check out much of Africa, much of South America, Turkey, Georgia, and Southeast Asia. There are literally people eating better food and drinking cleaner water thanks to the fact that they can maintain their hard-earned value with bitcoin.
Nobody said capitalism is bad. Nobody said guns are bad, I have no idea why you would feel the need to conflate issues. I get that you can read headlines, but dig a bit deeper, and you will actually be able to argue from thought-out stances. The crypto oil thing was a scare tactic that got thoroughly disproven many years ago. Mining is rapidly ushering in the transition to renewable energy sources. It is also preventing waste of energy that would just dissipate.
The information is out there. It's just up to yourself to put in the work to educate yourself. I don't mean run around trying to find anything that will agree with your original hunches or whatever to try to guard your ego. I mean, look at it with fresh eyes and be willing to expand your view after critically analyzing the situation without bias. It is actually a good thing to be capable of arguing from both sides so that you are able to honestly weigh the situation. Right now you are just spewing old headlines that you once saw and not even attempting to make a coherent argument.
It will only help you to educate yourself. It's not nearly as daunting as it seems. The next step is to quit trying to defend a stance that you don't understand and to spend some time researching and asking questions. If you had understood what bitcoin was in 2013, then you would be in a much different situation than you are in right now.
A great way to really understand just how much Bitcoin and maybe some stablecoins are impacting the lives of people in poorer nations is to just go and talk to people. Spend a few weeks in Tbilisi or similar places and just walk around and talk to average people. Bitcoin is so popular amongst the average people there that many random little shops are even selling socks or Tshirts with the Bitcoin icon on them. So many lives have been saved, and the people there genuinely love Bitcoin.
There is a huge difference between crypto and Bitcoin. There are many shitcoins that try to pretend to be the next Bitcoin or whatever, but literally 99.9% of them are absolute garbage. Luckily, they are drying up and blowing away. For people who this stuff really matters for, they are able and willing to look deep enough to see the benefits of Bitcoin and are much less likely to fall into the BS traps of CyberCoin or whatever.
It is often the uneducated outsider that hasn't lived the horrendous harm of horrible government currencies that are so vehemently opposed to Bitcoin. It just screams privilege, like when some spoiled trust fund kid gets mad at homeless people because they won't just go home. When people are struggling to not drown and they find a life raft, they simply don't care if people in yachts tell them it looks tacky.
If you genuinely want to give this a fair shake, then Google things like "bitcoin encourages renewable energy after:2023" or "Bitcoin adoption in poor countries after:2022". Get recent information and be open to having your mind changed. Bitcoin threatens the imbalance of power, and this is why there is a push to get people in powerful countries to not think deeply about how much it is helping the less fortunate right now. It's just a matter of time though. Knowledge naturally spreads.
Yes, if everyone can produce as much of it as they want, then it would lose value. However, someone doesn't need to back something for it to have value. The most common currency in all of history was seashells. Nobody backed the seashells. Gold has had value for a long time and still does. Nobody backs gold. The reason these things had/have value is for a number of reasons, but possibly the most important reason is what you said, that nobody can just produce as much of if as they want. This is also a fundamental reason why Bitcoin has been steadily increasing in value, nobody can produce as much of it as they want. This is a major flaw that is inherent in fiat currencies(usd, euro, lira..), they can be produced as much as somebody(governments, counterfeiters) wants.
This is very simplistic, there are other reasons that various things are good ways to hold value. Divisibility and transportability are two big ones, both which Bitcoin excels at.
Traditionally clever Argentinians have used USD to escape the collapsing currency, but over the last couple of years, there has been a massive shift to doing this with Bitcoin and some stablecoins. Personally, I would just go for Bitcoin, but I do understand that there is less variance with stablecoins, so they may be a bit more practical for some people. Here is an article that goes into this.
Paying taxes is one thing, and of course it is necessary. Extra value is extracted by printing more and more money. USD used to be backed by gold, but they took that away. In addition to corrupt governments extracting value by printing more and more currency, counterfeitters also do the same. Bitcoin fixes both of these issues. There is absolutely no reason why Bitcoin and taxes can't coexist.
Furthermore, with bitcoin we can electronically transfer exactly how much value we want to without having to trust every single vendor with our credit/debit card numbers. Have you ever had to cancel a card because of fraudulent spends? Well, millions of Americans do every year and this also doesn't happen with Bitcoin. You send exactly how much you want to, you don't hand indefinite access to your funds to every single vendor to sell your information or steal from you whenever they want. In the last 2 weeks I've had over $400 stolen from my debit card because of this idiotic system.
The armed wing of Palestinian Islamist group Hamas claimed responsibility on Sunday for an attack on the Kerem Shalom crossing between Israel and Gaza, which Israeli and Palestinian media reports said had resulted in Israeli casualties....
I don't know if they have all been killed as human shields, but I see no reason to think that's not possible. All hamas would have to do is to stay places that there are large groups of civilians.
I agree the famine is awful. I've also heard many stories of gazan civilians hating hamas for stealing all the supplies intended for civilians. I really just don't know which stories are true and which are false.
I know that I've been hearing for years how much the palestians hate hamas and hate having them rule over them. They haven't had any sort of elections or anything or any way to get new power there for like 30 years or something.
I know there are lots of people in the west that want to paint hamas as some sort of freedom fighters, but this is not the impression I've ever been under. I see them more like a weak version of the Iranian government, no regard for the lives of their people, and wanting all those awful sexist backwards ancient warlord "religious" teachings to be the official law of the land. Just like in Iran, many people want to join the modern world in regards to human rights, but the powerful over there want to hide behind a butchered version of a "god" to make themselves keep their power.
I'm not sure how you are picturing "human shields." I don't think it is literally holding a child in front of themseleves as if they are a literal shield like in a cartoon or something. If this is the case, then I agree with you, 13,000 does seem high.
I've never been in war, but the way I am picturing it is by having military headquarters in residential places so that if they get bombed, then a bunch of civilians get bombed at the same time. When you consider how many people could live in just a single apartment building, it makes that 13,000 seem much more realistic.
I pointed out that it seemed like Hamas is reportedly using human shields and asked a question about it. I never said anything remotely similar to Israel being innocent in this. Israel has lots of blame here. They are literally blowing up innocent children. The existence of a single bad actor does not make all other actors good. I get that it makes the situation seem much easier to understand and have answers for if we push everyone to extreme sides, but I think you will end up with a more realistic mental model of this(or any) situation if you accept that the world isn't actually so simple.
Very good thoughts. It sure would be nice if there could be some sort of area where only non-combatants could go. Precision knife missles have been around for a long time now. It does seem suspicious that they are not being used in this current conflict.
I was curious how this current war compared to other wars and conflicts in regards to civilian casualties. By the way it is often shown, I assumed it would be towards the top of the list, but surprisingly, it seems to be around the bottom. 69% of Israeli casualties have been civilians as opposed to 59% of palestian. The high end from this wikipedia list seems to be around 90%, the low end roughly 50%.
It's so crazy that stuff like this is still going on. I do wonder how much this particular conflict is caused by all the archaic superstition around spiritual thinking and magical land. If it wasn't such a "holy" place I wonder if it would be so awful. Hopefully, some soon-future generation can finally discard all this "love" inspired hate.
Great point! Here are samsung instructions for this.
Download chatgpt from play store (ensure its by open ai and not a scam app). Set it up and make sure you have access to the voice feature
Download good lock from galaxy store (NOT play store)
In the good lock app, In the "life up" section, download the "RegiStar" module.
Open the RegiStar module and click the "side key press and hold action" setting. Turn it on
In the options underneath, choose "open app". Then scroll to the chat gpt app in the list, and click the setting icon next to the name. Then click "voice".
Now you should be able to long press the side button to directly access the chatgpt voice assistant.
No problem. Here is a fairly short video showing the Praison system of agents and tools. He shows how to do it locally as well, so there is no need to even use an openai api or any other remote model. This means it is simple to do the whole thing even with uncensored models or any other fine-tuned model for special use cases.
AI bell curve
EU chat control law proposes scanning your messages — even encrypted ones ( www.theverge.com )
I Will Fucking Piledrive You If You Mention AI Again — Ludicity ( ludic.mataroa.blog )
How stupid do you have to be to believe that only 8% of companies have seen failed AI projects? We can't manage this consistently with CRUD apps and people think that this number isn't laughable? Some companies have seen benefits during the LLM craze, but not 92% of them. 34% of companies report that generative AI specifically...
Jordanian reporter gets one year in prison under draconian new cybercrime law ( rsf.org )
Israel Has Used White Phosphorus on 17 Towns in Lebanon Since October ( truthout.org )
British climber and Nepali guide feared dead after reaching Everest summit ( www.theguardian.com )
A British man and his Nepali guide are believed to be dead after reaching the summit of Mount Everest on Tuesday, a guiding company said....
ChatGPT Answers Programming Questions Incorrectly 52% of the Time: Study ( gizmodo.com )
The research from Purdue University, first spotted by news outlet Futurism, was presented earlier this month at the Computer-Human Interaction Conference in Hawaii and looked at 517 programming questions on Stack Overflow that were then fed to ChatGPT....
Rabbit: $30,000,000 AI Is Hiding a Scam ( www.youtube.com )
Linux Inventor Says He Doesn’t Believe in Crypto ( u.today )
Linus Torvalds, creator of Linux, does not believe in cryptocurrencies, calling them a vehicle for scams and a Ponzi scheme....
Hamas armed wing says responsible for Israel-Gaza border crossing attack ( www.reuters.com )
The armed wing of Palestinian Islamist group Hamas claimed responsibility on Sunday for an attack on the Kerem Shalom crossing between Israel and Gaza, which Israeli and Palestinian media reports said had resulted in Israeli casualties....
Rabbit was once an NFT company that it wants you to forget about ( www.xda-developers.com )
Rabbit R1 AI box revealed to just be an Android app ( arstechnica.com )
Rabbit R1 AI box is actually an Android app in a limited $200 box, running on AOSP without Google Play....