HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submit | optimalsolver's commentslogin

Yeah, for all we know there's a creature at the bottom of the ocean that's just as intelligent as humans, but it's hard to build a civilization with fins.

Yeah, we're all dead.

The fear will again be if the HybridAgent model is being faithful to pseudo text generated, even if you can read it out partially.

Also, I just finished watching a video on AI 2027 scenario. I don't know if AI companies and researchers are using it as a cautious warning or as a target to hit (or if it's genuinely inevitable).

Yes, thinking in latent space might be the ultimate efficiency hack for CoT LxMs, but going down that path will (near certainly) mean we'll lost control, for one simple reason — humanity will have no way to pause and diagnose.

It'll be like a moody chimp with a button to the dead hand system (Systema Perimeter)


>Also, I just finished watching a video on AI 2027 scenario

Recommended? And if so do you have a link? I think the narrative presented would benefit from the medium shift


It was a "grading the AI 2027 report" video -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-qAht4w9Rg

Setting things up

Considering amount of iron available in human blood

Calculating number of paperclips that could be added to production

Preparing a plan for acquiring all blood

Considering if release of lab airlocks will limit paperclip production

Analyzing extinction scenarios

...



Do orange cats know they’re orange?


Interesting question. Cats apparently have "dichromatic" vision, and orange is among the colors that they basically can't distinguish from grey.

I have an orange male. He's awesome, and he doesn't leave anything on the table as far as cognitive ability goes. He's just very wrapped up in his important cat business that mostly resolves around territory, chipmunks and hanging out with his enemies.


My cat desperately meowed at me this morning to go outside to hang out with her enemies, which I denied her request. She brought a very much alive and unharmed chipmunk home the other day which was booking it around our great room until we corralled him outside with a broom. The live bird incident was even more dramatic. It’s like having a mischievious goblin living in your house. But she does keep the mice from coming in during the winter!


My parents' cat delivered a live baby bunny to the entrance hallways in the middle of my pre-wedding dinner. Once released the thing unfroze and zoomed under some baskets. It was an all-hands-on-deck exercise to corral both the terrified bunny, as well as the over-excited large dog who "wanted to get to know it".


I have similar stories with mine. Bringing live game into the house isn't mischief though. It's the highest praise a cat can express: as a trusted member of the pride, you're entitled to a share of the catch. You're also expected to notice the prowess.


One of my cats brought home what I thought was a dead mouse. Turns out it was a very much alive bat.

Rabies in bats is rare in Switzerland but still possible, so I had to go through post exposure prophylaxis.


Only Claude (Shannon) can save us now.


He's spinning in his grave, but below the Nyquist limit


Best comment in *

* dependent on velocity


Without the mechanization of book production, how many would have read his works?


From what I see on r/stablediffusion, Hollywood has maybe 2 years left, in the optimistic case.


Even if it gets good enough, you're forgetting about everything else that goes into movie making and distribution. Hollywood will keep their hold on media, they just might use AI to increase profits even higher.


But why Hollywood?


i am extremely wary of making any predictions about ai, given what's happened in the last year, but i would put good money on hollywood being around in 2 years. there's much more to the movie industry than slapping some video together.

r/stablediffusion seems to be a bit disconnected from reality, to put it nicely.


The vibe I get is like when the Meta VR app store product launched, and there was huge promises and optimism about all the amazing apps and experiences, but when you bought it and actually tried, it was a few juiced up flagship things and a bunch of shovelware.


ehhhh i dunno about that. the stuff i've seen from people, and watched looks much better than most crap hollywood puts out anymore


to reiterate: there is more to the movie industry than putting a video together


i agree but i've watched 40 minute videos that have an entire story to them that were quite good...so not 2 hours but getting there


Please post a link to some of this "stuff". I'm begging you.


But nobody will pay for that


Can we point to a single good piece of longform content from AI before trying to tick a clock on when Hollywood as a whole will end?


im seeing a lot more focus on emotions/emotional acting - its incredible. maybe 3 years and most likely from china.


I'll pass on slop stories and the quality of the visuals won't change that.


>humans can stay unique and special because they weren't created by anyone

Neither were rats. It's hardly an exclusive club.


Rats aren't as intelligent as humans ;)


What intelligence level certifies a being as unique and special?

Are there humans who don't make the cut?


Link for those who didn't get the reference:

https://x.com/AlexBlechman/status/1457842724128833538


>You made a mistake and now I can get a billion dollars more than we agreed to originally

The world "smart contract" enthusiasts dream of.


Wouldn't a smart contract also have a statue of limitation built in?


That's beside the point.

The main idea is that in legal contracts, the written signed paper is just evidence for what the agreed-upon contract was. The actual contract is the agreement itself - which the paper may not reflect exactly. If the two parties disagree on what is the actual contract, the paper is of course strong evidence for one side or the other, but it's not the final word, other evidence may be brought that contradicts the written contract and that can be held to be more convincing.

In contrast, the smart contract crowd wants the contract code to represent the final word, and if any party didn't notice that the contract code didn't match the understanding they had of the agreement, too bad.


A statute is an act of legislation, and a "statute of limitations" typically prevents courts from dealing with claims arising from matters that happened years ago (subject to some exceptions). The public policy arguments are usually that witness memories decay to the point of obvious unreliability, and that the maxim "equity aids the vigilant not those who sleep on their rights" was already the root of the common law doctrine of laches, but scattered over so much case law that putting the concept on a statutory footing is useful for the courts and all litigants (and especially defendants).

(In criminal law, "justice delayed is justice denied" and clarifications of constitutional or treaty requirements for speedy trials also can be tidied up by the legislature in a statute of limitations).

Statute (legislation) is a superior source of law to contract law, and so there is generally no way to contract to avoid being statute barred if a claim for breach of contract (or specific performance, etc.) is made beyond the statutory deadline.

Typically there are carve outs enacted in a statute of limitations that allow a claim to be brought out-of-time if the defendant has acted in a dishonest way that prevented a claim from being filed in time, for certain classes of litigant, or for certain types of claim. (And in criminal law, for certain offences - serious crimes will tend to have a longer, or no, limit on how long after the crime the prosecution is begun).

A statute of limitations typically does not extinguish defences based on the lapse of too much time; but such defences in some jurisdictions may be contracted away, leaving the statutory limit as the hard deadline.


The smart contract itself may have been the one that contained the mistake. We've seen this happen before and they just had to fork the chain.

It's all nonsense. In the real world people make mistakes and a court should be allowed to override and figure out the right thing to do.


There's nothing to prevent people from having a blockchain subject to court jurisdiction. In fact probably all blockchains are anyway, modulo the problem of enforcement.


A smartly written smart contract would. Will all smart contracts be drafted with such care?


No. They will not. And this is why we have law.

There's this thing that people often do, even within the law itself, that's just like "well, you can fix everything by just writing it correctly the first time."

And this will always feel retroactively correct and never workable in practice.


NO.

Because, as I say repeatedly:

Smart contracts ARE NOT CONTRACTS. Count them in the worst named things in computing.

A contract is a legal agreement that is mostly about stipulations on what to do if things go wrong.

A so-called "smart contract" is doubly bad named -- because it's just a stupid, irrevocable, unchangeable, piece of code. Imagine an ATM with the controls welded shut.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: