As many writers have said, the problem with "safe," "beneficial," etc is that their meanings are unclear.
Are we going to be AI pets, like in The Culture (Iain banks)? Would that be so bad? Would AI curate us like pets and put the destructive humans on ice until they're needed?
Sometimes killing people is necessary. Ask Ukraine how peace worked out for them.
How would AI deal with, say, the Middle East? What is "safe" and "beneficial?"
What if an AI decided the best thing for humanity would be lobotomization and AI robot cowboys, herding humanity around forever in bovine happiness?
Full disclosure: I've known jg since 1986. I have no insight into the Apple goings on, but the story that "he's the guy that made Siri suck" sounds very very unlikely to me.
Yeah, not attributing it to him, just his lack of being able to do anything with it. Could have been Apple Politics. Could have been a number of things.
Still. Idle hands, he should get back on that horse if he can. Go do more stuff.
Certainly. But I can't think of anyone using an idiom like "just another cog, so don't try to do anything".
"Self-made man", "maverick", and various myths about lone geniuses and innovators without collaboration and supporters are heavily supported by (at least) American politicians and pundits.
People do not typically use a combined 75 of them in one short essay, and I pointed out several other reasons. Do you know many people IRL who use a colon/em-dash in almost every single paragraph they write, while also just so happening to mimick multiple other LLM writing patterns? Please do not be so childishly reductive. If my comment could be reduced to "it contains em-dashes", then the comment I would've wrote would be "it contains em-dashes".
please don't defend this atrocious llm writing style (and thus, implicitly, the broader issue of people outsourcing writing to llms) by picking random aspects thereof and pointing out that there are human writers who share them
t. someone who uses a lot of em-dashes and doesn't plan to stop
One real world task for this would be to log into safeway.com and click all the coupons. It's something Comet can't seem to do. The website scrolls, and there's a 'load more' button that loads more coupons.
QUIC might be great, but what about the PHY layer? How are they simulating that? Can the PHY later handle packets that take forever to arrive? And what happens if you have half a packet?
How would this compare to, say, using the same stuff that the Ham guys use? They were doing IP over slow links decades ago.
And really, why use QUIC or IP at all when it's literally point-to-point traffic? Just send tagged chunks using the simplest, dumbest protocol possible.
> Can the PHY later handle packets that take forever to arrive?
The PHY does not care at all. It's the job of the upper layer protocols which provide QoS, like TCP and QUIC, to figure this out.
> How would this compare to, say, using the same stuff that the Ham guys use? They were doing IP over slow links decades ago.
IP works over just about any 2-way pipe including serial ports. HAMs use packet radio which uses X.25 for the data link and modem modulation for the PHY: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Packet_radio
reply