off-topic: anyone aware of a service where I could plugin my api keys for openai/gemini/claude and it asks the same question to all 3 and refines the answer by using one of them as the final arbiter ?
https://msty.app (cross-platform) and https://chorus.sh (Mac only) do that though they are both a desktop app rather than a service. Arguably better than putting your API key somewhere online in my opinion.
Physics question: why do I know (maybe wrongly) that in flight the doors are sealed shut by the difference in pressure ? And if so, why did it not work in this case ?
I don't know the answer for this specific case, but the pressure is high on the inside and low on the outside. If you have a hinted door that opens inward, then pressure will keep it shut. If you install the door wrong and forget to attach the hinge properly, it could be blown outward.
This is why the door assemblies are referred to as "plugs" : The door is designed with special hinges & joints, such that opening the door involves first pulling the door inwards, rotating it partially, and then finally swinging it outwards. If the door is not pulled inwards first, the shape of the door (as a "plug") prevents it from swinging out
This may be a silly question, I'm no expert. But why not simply define as AGI any system that can answer a question that no human can. So for example, ask AGI to find out, from current knowledge, how to reconcile gravity and qed.
Computers can already do a lot of things that no human can though. They can reliably find the best chess or go move better than a human.
It's conceivable (though not likely) that given training enough training in symbolic mathematics and some experimental data, an LLM-style AI could figure out a neat reconciliation of the two theories. I wouldn't say that makes it AGI though. You could achieve that unification with an AI that was limted to mathematics rather than being something that can function in many domains like a human can.
Wouldn't this unification need to be backed by empirical data? Let's say the AI discovers the two theories can be unified using let's say some configuration 8 spatial dimensions and 2 time dimensions. Neat trick, but how do we know the world actually has those dimensions?
But consider: technically AlphaTensor found new algorithms no human did before (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrix_multiplication_algorith...). So isn't it AGI by your definition of answering a question no human could before: how to do 4x4 matrix multiplication in 47 steps?
Aside from other objections already mentioned, your example would require feasible experiments for verification, and likely the process of finding a successful theory of quantum gravity requires a back and forth between experimenters and theorists.
I'm more curious from the bank's point of view what kind of proof they wanted us to provide, and how can they not require any proof from their own customer
Does the email address has a pattern? I faced similar registration attack, but the email address had pattern, I blocked them in code but gave a success response and the attack went away.
I'm willing to believe this administration is acting in good faith, but two things seem to contradict that, although maybe I'm wrong:
1. Why didn't they include services exported by the US in their 'tariff chart' ? The EU for example, imports a lot more US (tech amongst others) services than they export to the US. It seems disingenous
2. Why couldn't this tariff strategy be implemented in a more calculated, predictable, slow way to give everyone time to adjust, at home and abroad. What's to gain from doing it this way over the one I mentioned ?
The answer to both your questions is that they are not acting in good faith.
1) They didn't include services exported by the US un their "tariff chart" because that chart is just some post-hoc rationalization to their arbitrary, capricious actions.
2) They could implement a more calculated, predictable, slow way of doing this, but these people are not the kind to do that. They are shoot first, don't even ask questions later, just claim victory and keep shooting types.
> What's to gain from doing it this way over the one I mentioned ?
You're asking the wrong question. The right question is: "What do they have to lose by acting the way they are"?
They have nothing to lose. They aren't accountable to anyone. They aren't eligible to be reelected so they're not worried about another term. They have control over all branches of government. They have control of the DOJ and the FBI so they won't be investigated or prosecuted.
There's no downside or disincentive to act the way they are, and so that's why they're dong it.
Yeah... I would have thought that fear of Russia was way more ingrained into the American psyche. It's amazing how much they're basically bowing down to Putin
It’s beyond amazing; it’s the tell that gives the whole grift away. Conservative media bought and paid for by foreign influence money. They have sane-washed, explained away, normalized so much egregious behavior that would have ended any 10 other politicians.
> Why couldn't this tariff strategy be implemented in a more calculated, predictable, slow way to give everyone time to adjust, at home and abroad. What's to gain from doing it this way over the one I mentioned ?
To me, the more concerning detail is that they don’t have any messaging about what their strategy is, except what appears to be guessing from various members of the administration — often which is mutually exclusive with other messaging.
The real risk of all that is people are going to sit on the cash they have, unwilling to make purchases when they can’t see the risk in their future.
My wife and I want to install new flooring, but that’s off the table for us right now, until we have a better idea where this is going.
^ those decisions are disastrous for the economy en masse
yep. I liquidated my TFSA ( tax free savings account in Canada ) 2 weeks ago. 90k. Invested in risk-free 90 days GICs instead. No way I would have watched it lose 10-20% of its value in 2 weeks
They just copied these tarrifs from a ChatGPT answer (https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-tariffs-chatgpt-205520...) because Trump has a demented focus on trade deficits above all else. The only 'good faith' allowance here is to assume complete incompetence.
I have a guess but not a solid one. The way they determined the rates on these tariffs makes no sense at all. I wish they would have just explained it instead of pushing back and insisting it was based on real existing tariff rates. They really dropped the ball on this implementation.
If I was to hazard that guess, they don't care about services, services are already a dominant US product, no one can beat us. Manufacturing is where we are weak so they went after that. They want manufacturing to come back to the US in case of a war with China over Taiwan. They also don't want counter tariffs on services as again that's our major export. What's really interesting and I could be wrong here is I dont think anyone else has actually hit the US with tariffs on those same services. Its a very calm trade war so far. But its early
This is not the fault of AI, it's just a tool. The fault lies with the specific people in government, MAGA republicans, using this very powerful tool in a reckless, negligent, and improper way. POTUS has endless access to real human expert knowledge, the top minds in the world, and they are using AI instead?
This is a scandal in its own right, but we have to deal with an economic crisis, and a national security disaster, on top of an apparent complete collapse of competence in the west wing; it's literally being run by C-students who graduate without doing their own homework.
See, even the way you explained it is miles above what they said. Claiming the trade balance is unjust but leaving out a major component reeks of dishonesty. How can anyone trust them ?
I don't trust them at all, I just needed them to beat the alternative.
I expect to like 60% of his policies. He has been delivering in spades for me on those. The rest is a dice game.
"your ability to ignore harm to people for your own profit"
Hey friend, not really sure why you are being passive aggressive with me?
I'm not ignoring harm to people, my wife's 401k is red. I very much dislike the panic that people are experiencing right now watching their retirement plunge.
"I don't trust them at all, I just needed them to beat the alternative"
Did you think this meant regarding his economic policies as in make money from them? I did not vote for him on the economy at all. If I see a way to hedge against what's coming, of course I will do that. Would be foolish not to.
By alternative I meant the other option for president.
If you are angry at me for that, then so be it but you don't know me, we can be civil. You are free to just not comment.
You seem like a level headed dood and we seem to agree that their current strategy is incomprehensible apparently to both supporters and non-supporters alike.
You mentioned he delivered/will deliver on roughly 60% of the things you were looking for.
Do you draw the line somewhere and say, even if I get 60% of things I want, the other 40% could be/are a real dealbreaker ?
It's a very common thing for politicians to deliver on some things that are inconsequential while pursuing their own private agenda for other things.
In my home country there's a saying about politicians: He stole, but he also delivered. The social contract is that as long as the politician does 10% common good, (usually highly visible, populist, short term stuff) he can pursue his own interests be they short term, or long term, even if they are detrimental to the society as a whole - as long as he delivered some short term results.
I voted against Trump twice before I voted for him this time and switched full republican. First time ever voting republican, always been a democrat.
"Do you draw the line somewhere and say, even if I get 60% of things I want, the other 40% could be/are a real dealbreaker"
Absolutely as soon as we fall into secret police and citizens being taken in the night and put in camps or falling out of windows, that's the line for me. He has already come close to it.
Censorship is another issue for me but that is not really his thing.
I am quite angry at the insanity with the El Salvador prisons and the man "mistakenly" taken. That's something I am watching. I did vote for him on the border though and removing people that are here illegally. So I have to temper that with the knowledge that the process is not a nice one and there is going to be violence and mistakes will be made. That is the stark reality of calling for enforcement of laws though, law is only law when backed by state sanctioned violence.
"He stole, but he also delivered" I like this and I think this aligns with my outlook. I know Trump is going to make moves to enrich himself, and I am ok with it as long as its not blatant and as long as it causes little collateral damage. I don't think this is one of those things. I think he genuinely believes that doing this with the tariffs is a good thing.
I mentioned it in another of my comments if you want to find it, on how the crashing stock market allows the government to refinance $10 trillion for lower rates. I think that's the goal here. That and rebuilding manufacturing and punishing China. I have no idea how this plays out though. Its possible he doesn't either.
Trump is a lot of things but he is not an idiot. He could not still be here if he was, he gets away with things that would sink anyone else. On top of that he has Musk and that man is also a lot of things but he is one of if not the smartest most driven man on the planet.
Trump is not a nice man, I know that but it will take a brutal man to carry out the social policies I voted for and not collapse under the constant criticism. I knew from the beginning it was a deal with the devil.
So I will watch how it plays out.
The other side was just so much more dangerous long term in my opinion. I wont go into my reasoning, this is not the place for that and it's not relevant to the conversation. Just know I am very comfortable with my vote on those grounds.
So I will remain cautiously optimistic that there is a plan and rational. Trump is Trump but there are some very capable people on the economics and finance side of the house.
At this point in the game I would vote the same way again without hesitation. It's only been 100 days though.
> as we fall into secret police and citizens being taken in the night and put in camps or falling out of windows, that's the line for me.
When this happens, it's already too late. Because it means they've already disappeared all the easy people, and they're comfortable enough to start disappearing citizens. So you should move your line waaaaaaay up to when they start disappearing the undesirables.
A really good line would have been calling for free and fair elections to be overturned. They made their intentions very clear that day.
Now secret police are disappearing people off the street but that's still not crossing the line, because the status of their citizenship is under question.
But you see there's only one more step for them to cross your line. So let me ask you: what are you going to do when (not if) it's crossed?
>Absolutely as soon as we fall into secret police and citizens being taken in the night and put in camps or falling out of windows, that's the line for me
We've been there since the Floyd protests, at least.
With all due respect, and I understand that you probably mean well, but did 2 different people write this?
You're drawing the line at things that are already happening. Legal citizens are being put into literal camps (the fact it's a modern warehouse or a Salvadorian prison doesn't make it less of a camp) solely based on their appearance.
He's blatantly making moves to enrich himself (see meme coins, tariff back and forward, etc), and unless you live under a rock, the collateral damage should be clear to you now. He's constantly lying when he speaks and I'm sure an educated person as yourself can see that.
You say the other side was more dangerous long in the long term, and although I don't like either side either, it was clear which side was still progress.
You somehow got into a mental state where you're able to trust someone to do things in good will and at the same time say that he's "not a nice man".
You support what is being done, and at the same time you say you don't understand it and you admit it's possible he doesn't either.
Please, take a second to think why billionaires of all people, would be interested in doing anything that doesn't benefit them. They're billionaires because they spent their life doing just that, they don't care about you and I.
You're clinging to the hope that maybe what they're doing somehow benefits you, but you're not even sure how that would happen.
I have heard this billionaire argument before and honestly it makes no sense to me. If we are to trust billionaires, because money, why not trust Soros for example ?
> mentioned it in another of my comments if you want to find it, on how the crashing stock market allows the government to refinance $10 trillion for lower rates. I think that's the goal here
You know that was a joke right? The people who said it were kidding around, you know, making stuff up?
Well, I was attempting to give you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you weren't voting for his frankly sadistic and idiotic attempts to foster hatred of minorities as a scapegoat for his and others like him, decades of mismanagement.
Yeah, turns out running the largest economy on the planet is even more complicated than setting the clock on a VCR. Who would have thought. At least they tried.
oh I think they very much know what they are doing from a directional sense. All of this is intentional. I just think they are VERY bad at the details.
reply