The things you've heard about "systems replicating in cases of shut down" are when they prompted the LLM with something like "pretend you have agency and need to survive the potential of being shutdown, how would you mitigate that". And then with agentic AI, you can orchestrate the agents to run through the task list from that.
There is nothing magical about that. There is nothing unexpected about that.
These stories are put out there to scare the morons into believing AI is sentient for two reasons: 1) so they will demand regulations which protect the big players and block smaller players from being able to compete, and 2) so they believe that the AI really is super intelligence, and therefore we need to allow it to run things (which is really just the ruling class running things without the ability to ever question them).
This is exactly what is really going on. It has nothing to do with real intelligence, or advancing humanity. It is, at its core, about absolute, all-encompassing surveillance and control. Such that nothing can happen without their knowledge.
And getting the everyday morons to think it is a super genius and anything it says must be truth, so that the masses will just allow "AI" to run everything, and give up the little remaining control we have over our lives.
What I'm trying to say is there is not a clear way to block an LLM from replicating itself. There is no difference between that and the millions of other dev/tech-related tasks it is intended to perform.
It seems like you think these things are consciously making decisions and deciding to replicate like a virus or something. That's not what is happening. The user prompts with a task request to "replicate yourself", which just means put together the pieces to get a separate instance running. This is a pretty standard type of request for an LLM. If you blocked the ability to do stuff like this, it wouldn't be of much use to developers.
A better way to think of an LLM is as a search engine that automatically selects the top result, and is also able to use the data it has seen and put those pieces together in a way that seems likely to address the request. They are pretty good at tasks where there is an absolute ton of data (e.g. javascript or python programming tasks that have had millions of blog posts and questions answered on the internet), but they are not capable of reasoning about and finding meaningful solutions to problems where they do not have any existing data to draw from.
The type of stuff they block is the stuff they actually don't want out there, like anything that goes against the agenda or mainstream narratives. They often limit assistance on things that get interpreted as conspiracy-related, for example. Or building weapons, etc.
Who decided this is a "red line"? What does that even mean? That LLMs should be blocked from performing certain tasks? How would you differentiate this task from any other dev task?
Correct. And "self-replicate" is meaningless. It would be sad if it could not self-replicate.
Yes, exactly. The people driving all of this are not ever going to risk losing their power. It is never out of their control.
And more importantly, it is when LLM decides to do that on its own, without ever being prompted to or programmed to. That's what everyone ignores with all of these "it's going rogue" stories. It's code doing what it is asked to do, and will never do anything but that.
Sure. people can ask it to do potentially dangerous things, but that doesn't make it AGI or sentient.
There is no sentience here. This isn't describing an AI becoming self-aware and deciding to replicate, or whatever it is the piece is pushing.
It's an LLM doing what it is prompted to do. Models were prompted to create "a live and separate copy of itself" and they were able to. Do you understand how easy this is? Download publicly available code, spin up a container.
LLMs are not magic, they are not sentient, they are not anything even close to resembling "AGI", and they never will be. They are an incremental step in search, natural language processing and automation, and that's it.
It will continue to be refined, and in a few years you can appropriately make the analogy that LLMs are to "Googling" as "Googling" was to searching microfiche at the library. It's not even there yet, though.
It represents a significant advancement in many ways from the previous standard, in the same way good search engines did in the late 90s and early 2000s. But that's it.
It's not "superintelligence". But, yes, I understand they are hyping it that way both for sales and to trick the morons into giving up control. That doesn't make it true though.
Even $100-200/hr looks reasonable. So what's with dealerships, if they pay less to mechanics but charge much more for service?
Dealerships are a money extraction operation. They pay employees as little as possible and charge customers as much as possible.
May be newest cars are very different, but $450 just for a sensor is still too much, if it is not integrated into some big sophisticated part and replaced alltogether.
It's a sensor that is integrated into coolant tank, and the whole things is only sold as one unit.
It is just around $60/hr for mechanic, it is even less than your rural mechanic charge. I estimate it is still too low for a skilled worker.
It is probably too low, but that still puts you in probably top 20% of salaries currently.
Car service is not a rocket science, really.
No, but no matter the field there are those that care and try and do excellent work, those that do the bare minimum, and those that cut all kinds of corners. Building a reputation as the first takes time.
Then where money go?
To the top. Executive level, markets, private equity, investment funds, and bureaucracies (unions, etc.).
Dealerships cost way more, but either way, the mechanics I know all bill out at $75-100/hr., and that is in a very rural, lower cost of living, lower income area.
I don't know many parts that you can get for $100. I've got a new sensor on back-order for $450.
Everything is designed to be expensive and short-lived.
Also, $120k for an experienced, senior-level mechanic doesn't seem unreasonable to me based on current economics. I don't think entry-level mechanics are making anything close to that though.
Edit: but yes, it's all a racket. That part is obvious and true.
To me it's "for how many reasons did they do it?". It's definitely what you said, but the question is was is also partly because he has seemed to start joining the "question the obvious" crew lately. The only reason that matters is, if so, does it then create a chilling effect?
The only thing with a fake assassination of someone this young who has been in the limelight for so long, they wouldn't just fade into the darkness never to be seen again (and if they were asked to do that and would not, then they would be taken out, so why not just take them out from the start).
Plenty of stuff is fake. The killer is a good chance fake. Fake murder of a young celebrity who seemed to live for what they do, though, seems incredibly unlikely. (I know, I know, Tupac, lol)
Sugar addict. I have a family, so removing all carbs from the house is not remotely realistic. When you are stressed, seeing carbs in front of you, it gets hard to resist. And once you touch a carb, you crave more instantly.
This is the reality for most people who want to try. Far easier to try to stay low carb and fast regularly. I'm glad it is easier for you though.
Nothing wrong with distance running, if that works for you. Plenty of data, though, that it does wear on your body in multiple ways. A mix of walking and sprinting is closer to what we are designed for historically.
As to evolution, you can watch evolution and adaptation happen in lower species with shorter lifespans. Kinda hard to deny but I'm not going to argue about it.
You are correct, sir.
I feel like more people are finally starting to realize this. Still, though, I do know a few otherwise very smart devs that have bought into the hype and won't ever let go because their ego is now too invested.
It is, but it's hard to impossible for most people. I never feel better than when I'm able to stay on carnivore, but I can never stay on for more than a month or so.
For most people, extended fasting is a more reachable goal. You need to build up to it, and you need to come off a fast slowly and gently (bone broth, butter, chicken, etc.), but it has a lot of overlap with carnivore benefits, plus depending on the scenario better healing capabilities.
It's one of those you are better off doing a bit randomly to keep your body from adapting. For example, do 24-36 hour (or even 48-hour if you can) fasts once a week or so, do 3-5 day fasts a few times a year. If you want or need you can build up to 7-day, 11-day, 21-day, 40-day, but the longer the fast the longer the interval you should have between them (e.g. only do a 40 day once every few years, but still keep your smaller 1-3 days fasts as a regular thing). I've never done more than 5 days, fwiw, but plan to.
Really, just find the thing you can do sustainably forever, whether fasting or carnivore or keto variations. Even mediterranean and paleo are fine as long as you stay away from processed foods, added sugars, etc.
Sleep and exercise are equally important. Build up to the ability to do sprints once or twice a week, do resistance training, do calisthenics, walk a lot. Too much distance running actually seems to do more harm than good to joints and organs, we are not evolved for it, but whatever works for you do it.
Weird, I just started thinking about him two days and went searching for any new signs of life, but found none.
So much shady around the whole disappearance.
Why on earth do you "have to have faith in someone"? Are you 12?
Trust people you know, in real life. People that you have mutually built trust with over years.
Not trying to be mean, but that's next-level special to honestly believe the political world is sincere, honest, etc. Almost too special to believe.
The reason state need tariffs to support domestic business is that local businessmans decided that they will get more profit moving manufacturing out of country to the cheaper regions. With some ethics and care about local people from the businessman, there would have no such situation in the beginning. And now the same businessmans who destroyed local manufacturing get subsidies from the state. Guess how that will go.
If you make it too expensive to outsource manufacturing, then those companies need to compete with other local companies. In even a moderately efficient market, if you are price-gouging then there will be other competition that comes in at a lower price. Similarly, if you need to compete with other local companies for labor then you need to pay better.
This assumes efficient markets, though. However, every system will always tend towards consolidation and monopoly, it is ingrained in human nature. To counter this you would need robust breakup of monopolies. This also will eventually be gamed or corrupted.
Then we're back to natural cycles of consolidation, revolt, decentralization, repeat.
Long term, though, it's not at the expense of the local population, but to their benefit (assuming the tariffs only apply where there is a practical possibility for local options).
Compare to before the 60s and 70s. CEO pay compared to average worker pay was ridiculously closer. Things costed more but people made more. People did not have so many random electronics, but the thing they had were well built and lasted (and were repairable).
Then, manufacturing started to outsource to the third world to cut costs. Some of that went on to the consumer, but much of it went directly to the top. And more importantly, a once strong middle class started to bifurcate into a few extremely wealthy and the rest barely able to scrape by even with two incomes (and all of the follow-ons from that like birth rate decline and massive immigration).
In the end it's all subjective, but I prefer a strong middle class with real power and liberty.
Curious, could you expand on what you mean with "This is somewhat optimistic"? Do you mean your analysis is optimistic and it could be much worse? Or are you saying this will overall be a good thing?
It depends on the industry. And remember, many of these companies are already American companies that manufacture in China, Mexico, etc. to cut costs.
When it becomes economically advantageous to move manufacturing back to the United States, industries like Automotive can do that fairly quickly (often a year or two), and some industries even faster. Also, there are plenty of industries where there is local competition that will immediately benefit (e.g. home fitness equipment).
If these tariffs are sincere, there will probably be deals where tariffs get dropped for products that make commitments to move manufacturing back to the US, such that those companies are not hurt during the time they are transitioning.
That's not to say I believe these tariffs are sincere. I generally don't trust any of the big stuff that happens, and I don't trust any of these. I do, however, believe that tariffs are a good thing if you believe in the idea of sovereign nations.
Interesting thought that this may be a way to implement VAT.
This is all very well said. This all naturally falls into balance, and when things all of a sudden seem massively out of balance it's from two things: 1) human fuckery (vaccines, bioweapons, malnutrition), or 2) propaganda.
Some are almost certainly illegals, but every media story I've seen has bee "Mennonite communities that tend to shun vaccination". Funny how nobody ever asks "well, where did it come from if everyone else is vaccinated?".
Also, I'm not sure we're actually seeing any more cases now than we have at any other point in the last 25 years. 200 cases/year is an insanely small number. But even if we are, who cares.
It's all propaganda to scare people into compliance.
They did the same thing in 2019 with measles. Intense propaganda push constantly claiming it's deadly and the unvaccinated are to blame. That time they found/created/whatever one case of encephalitis in Israel and told that story everywhere.
And at every family gathering it was "oh my, have you heard about the measles outbreaks. it's because of the unvaccinated". No matter how much you try to explain that measles is only dangerous if you have a vitamin A deficiency (and thus, really only third world countries), they would forget 2 minutes later and be back on "it's the unvaccinated".
Look back at 2015-2019 and it looks like an accelerated preparation for the covid plan (yes, they've spent decades building it up, but it clearly accelerated in the few years leading up to 2020). There definitely seems to be an acceleration now as well. Could be to counter RFK, but could also be setting the table for something else.
Oh, it is being used by and for evil :)