JoshuaZ - Slashdot User

JoshuaZ - Slashdot User
Close
binspam
dupe
notthebest
offtopic
slownewsday
stale
stupid
fresh
funny
insightful
interesting
maybe
offtopic
flamebait
troll
redundant
overrated
insightful
interesting
informative
funny
underrated
descriptive
typo
dupe
error
181960408
comment
Two things can be simultaneously true: 1) Many of the AI proponents and CEOs exaggerate and overhype the power and usefulness of their software. 2) These systems are powerful and continue to get more powerful.
181873692
comment
That's a valid point. I cannot in that sense rule out that something like that is happening here. But even then, the default shouldn't be to dismiss what Mozilla is saying here simply because it is possible that they might have some hidden incentive. We cannot just dismiss evidence we don't like by imagining that someone might have an incentive to lie about it when we don't have any evidence of that lie. (That's aside from the fact that Mozilla is not the only organization at this point pretty impressed by Claude Mythos.)
181860848
comment
You think Mozilla has no reason to hype AI? And you took that belief right out of your behind, I take it?
They have some of their own AI systems, but they are a small part of what they are doing. But if you prefer, consider then the just weaker statement that Mozilla has no incentive to hype Claude Mythos. Are we in agreement there?
Incidentally, you just nicely demonstrated that you either cannot read or are quite dishonest.
Do you want to explain why you think I've demonstrated that?
181854258
comment
"This many bugs"? And how many is that, exactly? A lot? A few? Does it maybe have a relation to what the bugs were and what their impact was?
271, and yes that's a lot. And yes, it does have a relation to what the bugs were and what their impact was. Mozilla, who has no incentive here to hype Mythos or any other AI software
said that any one bug would have been a "red-alert in 2025."
And that is why I call this infantile. It does impress weak minds (as you just nicely demonstrated), but as soon as you know a bit more it is just ridiculous and means nothing.
I don't know what a weak mind is. We don't live in the Star Wars universe with Sam Altman or Dario Amodei is able to just wave their hand and say "These are not the bugs you are looking for." If by "weak" you mean intelligence, I'll free admit I'm not the smartest Slashdotter, but none of this is relying onon my own evaluation. oAll of these have been examined by the actual Mozilla experts who are highly concerned. It appears that you are confusing the ability to "know a bit more" with "assuming what I want to be true which would make me have to not change my mind at all." These are not the same thing.
There's another element here worth highlighting: By continuing to insist no matter what, that nothing these systems can do is remotely impressive or substantially improving, you are essentially removing yourself from the serious discussion of how to deal with these systems, how to grapple with what they can do, how we regulate them and a host of other issues. In order for those discussions to be useful, we absolutely need the input of people who are not enamored of the systems. But that also requires that those people, like yourself, acknowledge that these systems have genuine capability. I've seen you have conversations about issues that aren't AI on Slashdot, and I can see you can make valid points and sometimes have good ideas. You are a bright person; to apply that intelligence and careful thinking to AI, you need to be open to the possibility that maybe, just maybe, you might be wrong here.
181838622
comment
A system that finds hundreds of bugs, which were not found by humans or found by standard fuzzing, and that's "infantile" how exactly? You can if you want disagree with their claim that this will result in somehow finding all the bugs. (That's probably unlikely for a whole host of reasons.) But even you should be able to recognize the significant nature of the system being able to find this many bugs.
181787316
comment
Thank you for completely avoiding and missing the point. Reread the comment. If you prefer imagine a world where you gamble. Or instead imagine a friend who was could make either one of these bets. There's one side of the bet where if they took it, you'd likely consider them to be an absolute idiot and the other one where you'd see them as functionally getting free money. So the idea that you cannot estimate a probability for an event that is only going to happen once is just wrong.
181766134
comment
Spotted the frequentist.

More serious comment: If someone offered you an even bet on one side for $10 that next year Jesus's Second Coming will occur, I'm pretty sure you would take the side of it not happening, even though that's a single event. If they made the same offer for first contact with intelligent aliens, you would do the same. And I can list many similar examples. So you are able to make estimates about probabilities for events which will only occur once, based on your evidence and world models.
181684380
comment
The real purpose might be deniability. If Human Zuckerberg is an ass (which probably happens pretty regularly) or suggests something legally questionable (which probably sometimes happens) or suggests something unethical (which I'm sure sometimes happens) then it gets pinned back on him. But if the AI does any of that and there's pushback then meat-Zuckerberg can go and blame the AI.
181639118
comment
The judge in question is Michael Liburdi, and unlike many Trump judicial appointees, he was highly qualified. From the Wikipedia article you linked to:
Liburdi served as a law clerk to Vice Chief Justice Ruth McGregor of the Arizona Supreme Court. Following his clerkship, he joined the Phoenix office of Perkins Coie as an associate. In 2008, Liburdi spent a year working for the Federal Election Commission in Washington, D.C. as a Litigation Staff Attorney. In 2011, Liburdi joined the Phoenix office of Snell & Wilmer where he was a partner for five years. He later served as general counsel to Arizona governor Doug Ducey. From 2018 to 2019, he was a shareholder in the Phoenix office of Greenberg Traurig, where he served as chair of the Phoenix litigation practice. His practice focused on complex commercial and constitutional litigation, as well as campaign finance and election procedure compliance.[2] Liburdi also served as an adjunct professor of law at the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law at Arizona State University, where he taught election law from 2010 to 2016.[2]
This isn't one of the Trump appointees that needs to be deeply beholden to Trump. It is very tempting to think that a judicial decision one doesn't like has to be due to the judge's politics or connections, but it doesn't look like that is what is going on here.
181602984
comment
OpenAI is not the only major player right now. Google and Anthropic in the US, and to a lesser extent Meta/Facebook. OpenAI is just the largest. And there are a lot of Chinese models now also. And this isn't the only thing that has been said negatively about OpenAI or Sam Altman. There was one may recall the entire mess where they transitioned from being a non-profit to a for-profit and all the drama from that that largely revolved around Altman. When there's a bubble it is very tough to tell what finally is going to cause it to pop, and there will always look like there are a lot of reasonable things where one expects this will be the final thing that starts the inevitable cascade. There's an old rule about wanting to short sell stocks "The market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent." Also, it is important to recognize that tech bubbles can pop but the fundamental industry can stay. The internet bubble of the late 1990s popped, but we ended having more internet usage now than even the hype would have predicted. Similarly, the rail bubble of the laye 1860s/early 1870s popped, devastating the US economy, but the rail industry survived and largely continued to grow despite that.
181223134
comment
Not really. Care results fairly closely match Sweden’s once adjusting for confounding factors like weight, addiction, crime, genetics, and various statistical quirks (for example, Sweden doesn’t nearly as aggressively count premature birth deaths as infant mortality).
I agree with the last part in parethenses. Do you have citations for the rest?
Core vaccine schedule recommendations remain unchanged, and there’s zero proof of significant impact or negative impact.
Not for lack of trying.
Canceling federal funding for one particular research program at arguably the richest university in the world - with literally billions in endowments that it’s free to use - isn’t “cancelling all the mRNA research ”.
Bwah? The article I linked to is on Harvard's news site. It is not just about Harvard. As that article notes there's been about 500 million dollars of contracts canceled. Note that even if that were all Harvard (which it isn't) that would be a sizable chunk even in their endowment. And this has on top of that had a major chilling effect causing corporations to stop doing mRNA treatment research in general.
181216202
comment
The US does a lot less preventative medicine than peer European countries, so lower vaccination rates harm a lot more here. And aside from changing the vaccine schedules, they've done a lot else which I mentioned. Like cancelling all the mRNA research
which is going to have massive long-term damaging consequences.
181214738
comment
Minor note: Carter did not have solar cells in the sense of electrical production on the White House. Carter had solar water heating panels but they were not "solar cells" but just direct solar heating for water. See
. Solar cells at the time were still very expensive and not very efficient.
181214714
comment
A stopped clock is right twice a day is the old cliche. Concerns about microplastics are legitimate and are particularly linked to inflammation
and cardiovascular issues
among other concerns. We don't know how serious this is, but it is at least a problem and should be looked at furhter. This is a good thing, and should be recognized as such. That the same government is refusing to deal with CO2 and is actively trying to hinder the development of solar and wind power still holds. And I'm sure the damage to vaccines and sabotaging any new vaccine research or mRNA treatments will kill far more people than are helped by this. But it is a problem when science is politicized, and that's what's caused them to be so bad on other issues. It would be a mistake to start associating legitimate concerns about microplastics with the right-wing. Unfortunately, these same people are obviously trying to do that by connecting this to "MAHA" which is really more about really dumb ideas about masculinity and anti-vax attitudes masquerading as science. Don't let the justified contempt for these people cause one to start thinking that microplastics aren't a real problem.
181174680
comment
1) They don't need to turn the core on Earth. 2) Core's don't get straight from slightly enriched uranium to plutonium to highly radioactive in a few seconds. They take time for radioactivity to build up as there are more fission products.
« Newer
Older »
Slashdot Top Deals
Close
Close
(email not shown publicly)
Submitted a Story That Was Posted
Got a Score:5 Comment
Years Read
Re:So what happened to...
Re:So?
Re:So?
Re:So?
(Score:2)
Re:So?
(Score:3, Insightful)
SUB7IME
funny
(comments)
interesting
(comments)
insightful
(comments)
informative
(comments)
slashdot
(submissions)
Earth is warming faster than previously thought, scientists say, and the window
Sparc compact fusion reactor may be likely to work
All Dreamwidth links blocked on Facebook; silent deletion of existing links
Major breakthrough in quantum computing shows that MIP* = RE
New Mersenne prime discovered
If God is perfect, why did He create discontinuous functions?
Close
Working...