Perhaps controlling AI is harder than people thought.
They could "just" make it not reveal its reasoning process, but they don't know how. But, they're pretty sure they can keep AI from doing anything bad, because... well, just because, ok?
I think this is a funny thing on several levels - one you see the part that doesn't fit so you remove it making you the genius - in this way it's a nice motivational poster level thought.
But you could be a some. But if you were a some it would mean that there was no possibility of actually removing the some from the statement because it actually did describe accurately that there were somes that could avoid it.
Disclosure: very large eth miner, using hydro electricity that would have otherwise gone to waste. Generated power is very expensive to transmit. I prefer gpus to asics because at least ethash is constrained to a more widely available piece of re-useable hardware and doesn't require the latest release in order to have the best roi.
I always think it's funny when people use large planes as a reference for heavy weights, since they're designed to be as light as possible for the volume.
I think the Golden Gate Bridge is massively overengineered (although nobody really knows) because materials engineering wasn’t super advanced back then.
Why aren't I using tons of amazing South Korean and Swedish-designed products in my daily life if this is the case? (or jealous of all the great products they seem to have that I don't have access to?)
And H&M, Minecraft, Battlefield, MySQL, Candy Crush, Absolut Vodka, The Pirate Bay, Husqvarna, the pacemaker, the three-point seatbelt, the zipper, and much more...
Also, folks outside Korea don't generally know this, Samsung is way bigger than just phones, appliances or consumer electronics [1].
It operates businesses in sectors like chipmaking, construction, IT, chemicals, power plants, shipbuilding, etc.
If you've seen a Samsung container ship, or a Samsung-built building (Burj Khalifa, Petronas Towers), you'll have gotten a glimpse at their size and scope.
Their consumer-facing businesses are just the tip of the iceberg.
I just got back from a month in Seoul, and was very surprised when I heard that Samsung makes men's suits there. But, come on... Apple, Google, Facebook, Twitter, Tesla, SpaceX, Intel, AMD, Amazon, the US list goes on. Also as somebody that has visited both Sweden and South Korea for extended periods, they both are very pro-America and have an appetite for American consumerism and anything American made.
I hear you, but most of the metrics used were normalized (to GDP, R&D $, population, share).
Maybe on a normalized basis the picture looks a little different?
Also, totally unrelated, and I've never been to China, but based on the observations of Connie Chan (of Andreesen-Horowitz), it seems China has a bunch of innovations in the retail space [1] that most Americans aren't aware of. US innovation is still dominant no doubt, but I'm always fascinated by innovations that we don't hear about because it gives us a sense of perspective in the world.
Presumably the criteria and outcome are per-capita and per-GDP, otherwise every single ranking would just be of "what countries have the biggest population and the most money", which is not a very useful analysis.
edit; so the ranking is probably more of a "most innovation-oriented economies" [=higher ratio of R&D/IP industries to retail/manufacturing/agro/etc] rather than "countries creating the most innovations"
The idea of a private citizen owning land was not generally accepted in the medieval age of kings. Only lords and other nobility could own land back then. Technically, the king owned the land, and the Lords were simply stewards of the King... probably indirectly (King -> Count -> Lords)
Eventually, real estate could be owned by the common peasants and merchants, but that starts to get into modern capitalist style society.
They could "just" make it not reveal its reasoning process, but they don't know how. But, they're pretty sure they can keep AI from doing anything bad, because... well, just because, ok?