Does this mean that from now on bombings will happen with dumb bombs and that we can expect way more Iranian casualties? Otherwise this seems incorrect.
This article is stating the obvious that is written in many different places (except the ETF angle) while sounding like its some kind of expert being ignored. I would presume AI is afoot.
Stopped writing the comment, went and clicked the logo, yup a personalized AI reporting service.
Author here. There is absolutely no AI used in any of the writing I do. We use AI to track news and better understand global and economic developments.
Essays became way to easy to write with AI.
It used to be a basic filter that if text was long the author put a lot of thought (even if misguided) and effort (even if low quality) into it.
Not its just another torrent of words.
We need proof of work on long texts, a service that guarantees that the author was whipped for more than 20 lashes for this text to exists and thus we know he cared enough to publish it.
But why do you assume that you need unlimited amount of intelligence to perform work? If you can cut out just the parts that are required for doing SDR work or Development, etc you can get performance beyond what we have with generalized intelligence.
Even on the physical aspect think about it, if you need to do less networking between GPUs and can do more in each single chip, you can use more "tokens" for reasoning without increasing time/cost.
My bets for the actual story behind this are:
95% a criminal hiding evidence
4.99% an autistic attempt to "keep his privacy" for no reason at all
0.01% a genuine need to keep something away from the government
In all cases just don't cross security checks with evidence you wouldn't want to be seized, its not that hard
reply