We know for a fact that the current DoD are using private Signal messages for coordinating military action. We know they are constantly using private emails. We are sending the president's son-in-law to negotiate with foreign countries despite not being a government employee and also have massive conflicts of interest.
Amodei looks absolutely prescient for taking a stand against use of Claude in the kill chain. Not to mention how utterly foolish DoD looks declaring Claude to be a national security threat while simultaneously using to choose targets. No wonder they got humiliated in court.
Well, to people who don't believe in precognition, it sounds like Anthropic had quality control engineers dedicated to their military clients' usage. Basically running through the prompts and inspecting the answers and digging deeper how their chatbots gave those answers. Somebody must have pressed the high-alert button, resulting in Anthropic taking a stance.
Certainly possible but I'd assume DoD expressly forbid anyone looking at their usage and Anthropic had to support that to win their contract. They may have gotten wind of what they were doing somehow.
The governments are both pretty terrible, but China has been far more violent to it's own citizens in recent times than the US has. The recent non-citizen hunts and unwise involvement in foreign affairs notwithstanding, the US doesn't (currently) have a policy of ethnic cleansing and violating human rights on a massive scale on its own lands.
He isn't arguing that AI is useless. Only that Nvidia is propping up a massive financial deck of cards and that all the giant numbers being tossed around are fantasies.
The “iPhone moment” wasn’t a result of one thing, but a collection of different bits that formed an obvious whole — one device that did a bunch of things really, really well.
LLMs have no such moment, nor do they have any one thing they do well, let alone really well. LLMs are famous not for their efficacy, but their inconsistency, with even ardent AI cultists warning people not to trust their output
> SyberJet’s own history shows the challenges. Over the past 40 years, an eclectic mix of financiers from Dubai to Taiwan invested hundreds of millions of dollars in developing the plane maker’s lightweight business jets. But in all that time just four planes made it into the hands of customers.
Putting two and two together it seems to me that this business is a front for money laundering or something.
Pronatalists are outwardly concerned with birth rates while simultaneously railing against immigration while simultaneously begging for more H1-Bs. The implication is really "we need more white babies" but always taking a back seat to "I need more money".
> Pronatalists are outwardly concerned with birth rates while simultaneously railing against immigration while simultaneously begging for more H1-Bs. The implication is really "we need more white babies"...
No, and I think that's a slander. If you look at the numbers, birth rates are falling everywhere. There's no fecund area pumping out babies at a rate to use immigration to solve the labor component of the birthrate problem. And even the most fecund area may drop to sub-replacement rate in a generation or two, if the follow the patterns of everywhere else. It really is a global problem.
And the progressive immigration solution is kind of imperialist: exporting problems from rich countries to poorer ones, who are even less equipped to deal with them (e.g. "let's export our trash to Africa and plunder its youth").
I mean Elon Musk is not really subtle about his white supremacy and how it dovetails with his calls for more babies. I don't think he'd even be upset by reading this.
I'm well aware that birth rates are falling in the rich world. It's a universal problem across all wealthy countries regardless of immigration or social policy.
I'm also not certain that this is some kind of urgent issue we need to do anything about. It seems like a natural cycle. And maybe we're better off letting the global population taper off.
I think you're also off base on immigration policy but that's a separate topic.
> I'm well aware that birth rates are falling in the rich world. It's a universal problem across all wealthy countries regardless of immigration or social policy.
> I'm also not certain that this is some kind of urgent issue we need to do anything about. It seems like a natural cycle. And maybe we're better off letting the global population taper off.
Denial is certainty a response people can have to difficult or ideologically inconvenient problems.
> I think you're also off base on immigration policy but that's a separate topic.
How so? Liberals/progressives can be parochial and ignore of misunderstand the world outside their borders, falling back to their own little dogmas. Today, the math just doesn't work out for immigration being the solution for declining birthrates globally. And it'll just get worse as sub-Saharan Africa follows the trends of other regions.
I don't think anyone is saying immigration is a solution to falling fertility rates. I was pointing to the irony/hypocrisy of the people worried about there being too few Americans also worrying there are too many immigrants. And while I'm aware there are some negatives to falling population, there are also positives and the entire situation is manageable without resorting to exotic solutions. I still don't understand why it's urgent.
And while I'm sure most everybody can have misapprehensions about the world beyond their observation, I'd reckon that liberals are far less misguided than conservatives and also ask why the hell is that relevant? We're talking about people who are coming here. I don't really need to know what's happening Haiti beyond knowing there are people who desperately prefer to live in the US and are seemingly adjusting very well and definitely not eating anyone's cats.
reply