Ok, I get it. Your mind is made up, don’t confuse you with facts. You aren’t even reading what I am typing.

Nice. I just wondered how they were coming along.

Right now, I have to manage which model does what. So I don’t. It’s the companies dime after all, and they clearly value speed over efficiency. But the model I directly talk to doesn’t need to be super high end. It could be well versed in which model is best for what task and farm put all of the work to the right model for the job. Seems like that alone could reduce cost a ton. But then start adding in cheaper local models and the price could fall a ton.

It would also be more accurate. Like if I had a small local model for interacting with a set of apis. It wouldn’t make the mistake of not considering that the api paginates results. The general model makes this mistake over and over.

So I agree this is the direction of the future. Just trying to figure out when we will get there.

Same way other artist learn how to make art. By looking at other artists works and using them for inspiration. But I already said that. You just ignored it because you thought your reply was a mic drop. It’s not.

I dunno. The market affect is mostly perception. I mean why should unrelated stocks suffer when AI companies fall, yet they do. So I don’t think the length of time actually impacts the severity of the crash. But I’m no economist. That’s more of a “I don’t see why”, rather than a “no it won’t”

As they say… violence is never the answer… looks at history… uh oh… oh shit… well maybe it is.

Sounds like what you are saying is that then issue isn’t people with guns, it’s the wrong people with guns. And I very much agree. But if you take them from “the people” and leave them in the hands of groups like ICE. You have just increased the percent of people who have guns that are the wrong people.

If I could snap my fingers and make them all go away, I would. But that just ain’t possible. I support requiring licenses to have guns, and training being required for those licenses. I also support safe storage laws. But bans and restrictions that don’t actually stop anyone from having the gun they claim to control access to are pointless theater that needs to be replaced with useful legislation.

I don’t think he said we need more. He said don’t give up what you have. I don’t like the number of people with guns… but I do have to admit, if noone but the gov had guns. I think we would be in trouble. Nature requires opposing forces to establish equilibrium. Maybe there is another opposing force, but I can’t think of it. Admittedly, people having guns isn’t really stopping ICE from it’s rampage. But I can imagine it would be a lot worse if they had no need to fear armed resistance at all.

Well it’s a lose lose situation. They can’t stop kids from using AI outside of school. And in reality, they don’t have the skilled professionals or budget to even stop it in the schools. My son accidentally “hacked” his way to access other AI models than the one that was approved on the school devices. Their security is very weak. But if they could completely block AI, then the kids would be missing a part of their education that they are really going to need in the future. Given that, my opinion is that they should embrace AI in a sense. But teach the kids how to use it in a way that adds value. Just like making a math test that allows calculators, make assignments that allow AI. Then use a better AI to see if the kids managed to flush out the incorrect information. That will teach them to use AI, and since they will have to actually read what it did to fact check it, it will expose them to the intended subject matter. It ain’t great, but it’s something.

I think you are assuming everyone views pride and such the same way as you do. And I don’t think that is a fair assumption.
Try going to an eatery in a college town with a popular football team or such. Many will have a menu item named after a player. It usually some unusual combonation they used to order. And I have seen them take pride in that menu item. They certainly didn’t physically make it. But they did come up with the combo. In addition, some people don’t value the journey, they value the destination. And they take pride in getting their with the least amount of effort.
It’s all objective. There is no one right anwer to what brings people joy.

“more clear that the real future of AI is small language and open-weight models running on local desktop computers” So where are we with those smaller models? I haven’t been following them. Are they any good?

Look, none of use should be cheering for a full on pop of the buble. It will hurt all industries. And we know the oligarchy has insulated themselves in ways that will ensure they feel very little pain. It will be all the workers who will feel it. As for data centers, I don’t think we need the bubble to burst to fight that. Lots of jurisdictions are already banning them. That is what we should be cheering for.

A person can take one of those predrawn things on a peice of paper. Then fill it in with colors of their own choice. Another person starting from the same peice of paper can do the same. Odds are they won’t choose the same colors. So each finished product is different. The people didn’t make the outline, but they still made the finished product. And it can still bring them joy. Nothing wrong with that. Many artists have seen lots of art they didn’t create. Especially those who study art. That is one way to learn. They then take all that knowledge and make their own art.
A person can use AI to just “trace”, but they could also use it to truely create what they see in their mind, which would certainly be making something.

What? I want the computer to help me make the art I have in my head. How is that stealing? I want to say more crescendo, or make the low line lower. Or have me hum something and it write it. Then combine it with something else I hummed.
And I have plenty of areas to be challenged, and to develop. But only 24 hours in a day. I can’t be an expert in everything. But that doesn’t mean I couldn’t enjoy a greater variety of things if I had help.

AI doesn’t get 1 + 1 wrong anymore… but yes it can still be wrong. Most commonly if you ask it the wrong way. A calculator can do the same if you forget the parentheses, or mess them up slightly.
My feel is that the degree to which a wrongly inputed question can get a wrong answer is proportional to the complexity of the question you are trying to get an answer to. Kinda like computers made it possible for a simple mispelling of someone’s name to have much more massive consequences than before computers.

Are there really any AI offerings that are specifically tailored to kids? It’s all a crap shoot. I do agree they should at least consider others, but it wouldn’t have made a difference.

Hm, I suppose it is a question on semantics then. In the context of the original post, there is art I would like to create, but cannot, and if AI could help me achieve what I envision, that wouldn’t be a bad thing. So I suppose I could ohrase it as, not everyone can be the artist they want to be. In my case, sure, I could compose some music technically. But the massive gap from what is in my head and what would come out would be so frustrating I would not enjoy the hobby. And that is why I don’t do it. So if AI could make it so I would be willing to do it, that would be a good thing.

Perhaps how I said it wasn’t clear. When I said playing an instrument through college, I meant getting lessons and playing with official school and college bands. I had lots of education. I understand logically how to do the things. But I was unable. It takes more than education to be an artist.

I think not everyone who wants to be artistic can be. I sort of hear music composition in my head. But despite playing a musical instrument all through college, I could never play anything by ear. And memorizing music was really hard. So if AI could get what I hear in my head out, that would be astounding. It can’t yet, but you get my point. I also have poor fine motor skill, so drawing is out. Even with a computer and mouse it just is too hard. That said, I think what this really says is that people have a desire to consume more art, and they are willing to use AI to get it.

Gas stove tops in houses.