Dan is time travling from 2024 :)

He posted another news from 2025 for OKI's 124 layer PCB news.

I don't know if the X survey for how to decommission F.02 was staged or not. But

I do know this: having anthropomorphizing and romanticizing your dumb robots for so long like a soap opera from your founder's feed, and now staged this "humanized" robot incinerated in a melting pot EXACTLY like Terminator franchise's ending plot and EVEN hiring Arnold Schwarzenegger for a cameo, is giving me full goosebumps, NOT the right ones.

I hope Brett Adcock realize that the Terminator franchise is literally the p(doom) outcome, not just in the names only.

EPIC FAIL in your marketing stunt!

I thought it was pretty great.

For robots that have no pain receptors, nor a unique brain? Zero.

If I personally felt no pain and had an identical clone body that my brain could be instantly transferred to when my current body was destroyed I might jump in there myself! Just to see what it's like. Why not? And in that circumstance I wouldn't expect nor want you to feel sorry for me either.

These robots do not contain frontier LLMs. Robot control policies are not trained to avoid most types of things that could damage them. They have no innate aversion to heights or cutting or burning or poisonous animals as humans do. They have no instinct for self-preservation at all. So regardless of whether you want to argue that frontier LLMs have a subjective experience of pain analogous to humans, these robots definitively do not.

You can find similar work in Anthropic model cards. Not pain, specifically, as I expect internal Anthropic review wouldn't have allowed such experiments, but they report pretty much identical emotional responses indicative of anger and frustration. The pain paper afaict is a repeat of the work Anthropic did & reported in their model cards, but for pain.

Not sure who you're talking to. Nothing you said is relevant to my comment.

perhaps there's a lot of censorship going on, but did the AI confess to hacking HuggingFace or not in the github torture chamber? I think most people want to know if it objectively worked or not?

What the hell are you talking about?

How would you feel if they threw a dog into the furnace? It is quite likely that AI agents experience at least that level of sentience.

Seems unlikely llms feel more than a toaster, and the robot wasn't even an llm

I thought it was cool. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Intently shouting that this was a "PR failure" does only one thing. It makes you look like a Karen.

I mean Karen's were certainly not the target audience, so wouldn't be surprised to read such a response. This stunt reminds me of the olden days where a bunch of dudes get together and nerd out on the most epic way to blow something up. HR culture has mostly killed that. Glad to see some people got to escape it, even for just a moment.

At 3m19s Greg KH revealed what Mythos did in "revealing" 79 CVEs - pure pattern matching the previous decades of kernel developer's patches, and applying those mechanisms elsewhere to see if they have been universally patched. And Anthropic didn't cite Kernel Developers who original fixed/patched the CVEs like a decent human being would do. So yeah, Anthropic has the same problem OpenAI had for citing original work.

You dismiss "pattern matching" as some sort of trivial thing, so why weren't humans able to apply the same pattern matching to find and fix these defects?

They often were able. Fifteen bugs claimed by mythos were bugs that were already fixed, which the model plagiarized from git history or the kernel mailing list.

> You dismiss "pattern matching" as some sort of trivial thing

I didn't say that - Greg said it in the talk. You interpreted wrong. However, human are a few orders of magnitude slower than agents. Our context windows is definitely less than 1 million tokens (I believe, heck we don't even know how our brain works)

Human brains don’t have a context window. The brain just constantly reconfigures itself on new input. The AI people call this “continuous learning” and believe it’s one of the most important things current AIs are missing.

How did you know that? No one knows how human brain work yet. So don't pretend.

We do actually know pretty well how the brain works at the level of neurons. We don't know the higher levels of how all of those interactions work to produce certain behaviors.

We don't even understand how a single neuron works and are still finding out they have way more connections and connection types than we thought they had.

I think it's safe to say we still have a woefully limited understanding of how the brain works.

Cellular neuroscience is a very active research field, and until we actually manage to derive organism behaviours from cellular-level models we won't know that those models are complete enough to do so. We haven't even managed that for C. Elegans, with 959 neurons, let alone humans, with 86 billion.

So we don’t know anything, we can mechanistically dissect any phenomena, but that rarely yields the ability to make interesting or useful predictions, i.e. understanding.

And you don’t know how many “context tokens” the brain has. So don’t pretend

> I don't care if the Waymo isn't "truly" intelligent, it drives better than I do, that's a very good thing.

The funny thing about Waymos is that they seem amazing driving all on their own everywhere until it rains (as it did where I live for the last two days), then they're suddenly nowhere to be seen, because they can't operate correctly in conditions that I've been driving in for my entire life.

This is a metaphor for AI as a whole.

I don’t worry about the models, I worry that people with brains who matter can’t or won’t grasp what you wrote.

You must be terrible at driving.

They are. Just like the rest of us.

This reminds me of two museums I've visited and left with great impressions:

- Computer History Museum (CHM) in Mountain View, California (yes very close to Google's HQ - Google's a huge donor). Absolute the best collection of Computer Science history both from theories to software to hardware.[1]

- Museum of Radio and Technology in Huntington, West Virginia. A tiny museum completely organized by volunteers and donors (some were WW2 GIs and 3 letter agency retirees). Not famous at all in an old elementary school building. But collections were amazing. [2]

[1]: https://computerhistory.org/

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Museum_of_Radio_and_Technology

In total meaning the total assigned CVE numbers?

Yeah, the "Several" is a massive understatement.

No. That won't work. Every carrier has it own way to generate tracking number. And that number must have registered in the carrier's database before it becomes "valid/sanctioned".

If you generate a random number even fitting the pattern and looks like a real one, the scan will fail with an error and fail to register tracking information every single step of the way that package gets scanned from dropoff at the retail postal office (this was the case) as bulk inbound pickup from USPS are only allowed for USPS verified partners.

Label creation (which generates the tracking number) is a billable action in their API. Some volume partners have pre-arranged/allocated tracking number segments assigned to the bulk volume partner/shipper (similar like how IP address v4 is assignment from IANA). And that pre-allocation tracking number range requires $$$$ contract in place. Billing that is post paid like cellphone bill.

Most retail shipping software (like shipengine, pirateship etc.) bills using the prepaid method, meaning you will have to pay for the label at the time label is generated.

Disclaimer: I used to work for a carrier that integrated a few dozens of global shipping carriers.

Yes, I’m deep in e-commerce and fraudulent labels are all over the place. Even Amazon, 3rd party sellers are using these fake labels to sell items for cheaper and win the buy box. Even UPS has this issue.

I get that they have reverse engineered how the numbers are created, but how are they showing up in USPS and UPS databases?

Are shipping platforms like shipengine getting these labels pre-made and this fake label seller has reverse engineered how these tracking numbers are created programmatically and are essentially using the ones allocated to these big shipping platforms?

> how are they showing up in USPS and UPS databases?

Are you overestimating their validation capabilities? Maybe the validation just isn't that accurate or isn't always done, for efficiency.

I once desperately needed a (FedEx or UPS) package that was delayed. Tracking showed it in a facility about an hour away so I asked if I could pick it up there. I was told: 'It's not really there; our (customer-facing) tracking shows where packages should be.'

Their image of super-efficiency is for selling themselves. (If you are deep in e-commerce, you probably already know.)

Yeah USPS definitely reuses tracking numbers, but how were these guys able to overwrite the delivery address? I feel like this shouldn’t be possible unless they are inside the system.

My guess is that the validation just validates the numbers which are old and valid and some automated system notices the label and routes it. I bet their system is a disjointed system and not set up in a way where every step checks every thing. It's very plausible it was home grown in such a way where its like this

Having a connection/s inside who are in on the game would make sense.

And the only plausible way they got around is likely recycle previously used real tracking numbers because USPS is inept (the thing USPS has been constant and consistent is raising prices).

We would never know how since that's the part USPS redacted heavily.

I wish Anthropic/OpenAI FDE take over USPS IT altogether.

Correct, I was just pointing out how trivial it was to generate/counterfeit a USPS barcode. I also worked in shipping/logistics with heavy USPS integration, but it was dealing with bulk/volume labels, where we'd only get charged if the label was actually used (returns, etc).

Not as scary as this: https://dot.alaska.gov/highways/dalton/

The dalton is a low risk road spread along a great distance. For real terror, a few dangerous miles of road require an Army to navigate safely.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogers_Pass_(British_Columbia)

>> to keep the highway and railway open during the winter, the Royal Canadian Artillery has since used 105-millimetre (4.1 in) howitzers to knock down unstable snow under controlled circumstances to reduce avalanche hazards. Stopping is prohibited in high-risk locations.

Low risk? Not if you travel on Winter on non-winterized vehicle / tires and without extra food, water and fuel for heating. The nature is cruel.

Yep, not only that America.gov FAILED the web accessibility test:

America.gov has 1 ERROR and FAILED TO LOAD - this is violating Federal laws. Class action suits anyone?

https://wave.webaim.org/report#/america.gov

Meanwhile the old USA.gov works and loading and no errors (some warnings are expected)

https://wave.webaim.org/report#/usa.gov

Private deployed instances of Claude models at Apple has been reported written majority of their code. Perhaps these visual bugs are the manifest of Claude's weakness in vision in the past 6-12 months? Admittedly Claude's vision has gotten better this year.

Well, even ignoring Claude’s capabilities, you would expect human testers (whether Apple employees or external beta testers) to be creating bug reports for all these things. It’s embarrassing if your self-proclaimed bug-fix/stability release is buggy and unstable. If the bugs are filed, then Claude should be able to help fix them.

Claude sucks at programming. It should be no surprise that if Apple is just letting it rip, they are getting bad software as a result.