The important part is HOW they want to pace the frontier. Not by actuall slowing down themselves, but by having the government create expensive regulations, like having independent verifiers "verify" the models before release.
Now, something tells me that those verifiers would verify anything an american company in good standing with the Trump admin releases, and likely nothing else.
And obviously, since verification is so incredibly important, we can't allow models, open or not, from other non-verified companies.
Think of the profits...I mean, the kids, or something.
Every single issue they brought up in their blog post starts with even just 1% AI code. If they actually believed the absolutely absurd stuff they spew, banning it all would be the only logical solution.
The current solution solves none of the issues, AND pisses off most sane people (mostly because their arguments are fabrications). They dropped the cake and shit on it too.
Bad examples. Use meat consumption. It will blow any other kind of "non-essential" resource use out of the water, on ALL fronts.
It's really hard to believe that people care about the personal impact of their decisions, when it's only ever other peoples decisions that get talked about.
Meat is particularly ironic because it uses an obscene amount of water. Even worse, a lot of the feed for cattle comes from the imperial valley in CA, which has first dibs on the Colorado River, which is on the verge of collapsing. Obviously they aren't cutting usage.
But datacenters using water is what the public needs to fear...
No one was talking about the ethical part (which you may or may not agree with). Carbon footprint is an actually measurable quantity that we can compare - what's your problem?
Considering that especially leftists have spent literal decades hating on vegans for telling them about their individual footprint, there is no real fallacy here.
AI haters have somehow discovered personal responsibility. Awesome. They've never ever applied that to anything else they PERSONALLY do, though. It's only things others do. For any personal choices, suddenly it's all the governments fault or the corporations fault. No personal responsibility to be seen.
My 5-ish years of veganism have easily made up for a life time of prompting. Yet, I still would never generate video or images in part because of their impact.
How many of you non-vegan AI haters are going to be vegan now?
This is such a strange reply I don't even know what to do with it. Good on you for being vegan, and not prompting?
I have gone lacto-ovo vegetarian in the past year, so I'll take your 5 years of veganism as inspiration. Otherwise, I welcome people waking up to the harm they cause, regardless of their past hypocrisy.
Being flawed isn't the issue. Everyone is flawed. The issue is blaming people for problems like environmental damage, while at the same time needlessly causing more damage yourself. The problem is being hypocritical. Some people are certainly more hypocritical than others.
I mean, I actively advocate for better fuel efficiency standards but also haven't entirely eliminated red meat from my diet. If I'm discussing fuel efficiency standards and you call me hypocritical, even if I granted that, it doesn't seem like a useful turn of the conversation for anyone unless it's a rhetorical move to change the topic of conversation?
Advocating vs blaming. Blaming people for using inefficient vehicles when you eat red meat (assuming you eat enough red meat to have more of an impact than the fuel) is hypocritical. Advocating for better alternatives to inefficient vehicles while eating red meat is not hypocritical.
I've gone chicken only. Mostly because pork and beef are too expensive. It is very hard to get 150+ grams of protein a day on a vegan diet. And butter is in almost every delicious baked good. Avoiding it is like having the worst allergy.
The freaking point is that basically anything worth running will have that amount of access, even Flatpaks. And you don't freaking know what's malicious before hand.
I think that depends on your point of view. I wouldn't run a program on my computer unless I were sure that it's not malicious. And if you mean that some program I already trust could be exploited, that's true even for the Linux kernel or any sandbox / security solution you would come up with. I'm not denying that there's always a risk, but there's nothing good in running arbitrary code that you can't trust.
For a single user, opinionated, modern, developer focussed OS, this is completely and utterly on par. Using docker as a developer without this is just plain annoying.
DHH was on the Lex Fridman podcast talking about this recent release of Omarchy in that most of it
is "vibe coded". It is mostly just a bash script to configure Linux, but his approach is interesting.
AI as a core part of the OS that can just change or add anything you want. Linux is great for this because it has access to the source code for everything.
He said he didnt review the code line by line, just looked at the shape of it. Whatever that means.
I recently used Arch Linux because I have a 4 GiB Mac Air that I want to use for something but it has too little RAM for UI.
The installer was user friendly and fast. I got exactly what I wanted.
There's no universe in which just buying a second or a larger subscription isn't a billion times better and cheaper than any kind of comparable local workflow.
Privacy, experimenting with ML and "unorthodox" needs are currently the only acceptable reasons to do local.
Well I wouldn't say a billion times better. I've actually been having a surprising amount of success working with local models. And my investment has only been the equivalent of 4 months of a Max x20 subscription.
Experimentation and privacy are definitely advantages, but it's also quite a lot of fun.
Now, something tells me that those verifiers would verify anything an american company in good standing with the Trump admin releases, and likely nothing else.
And obviously, since verification is so incredibly important, we can't allow models, open or not, from other non-verified companies.
Think of the profits...I mean, the kids, or something.
reply