The author needlessly and inelegantly deploys “incident” and “cyber” twice in one sentence.

In a just world, copyright should be abolished with extreme prejudice should it's continued existence prevent humanity from developing aligned artificial super intelligence.

I disagree on so many levels that it would be impossible to have a reasonable debate. To give only my most charitable counterpoint:

(If, big if*) successful AGI will be such an accelerant to human thought, it should be able to reproduce every human work, every scientific theory, etc. without any training data, in a decade.

All we have ever done as humans is look at the world and ourselves, and then create new data out of what we've seen[0]. Now imagine how much parallel compute we could throw at doing the same thing.

[0] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=f-XyJ3GlrWw

* Big, enormous, trillion dollar if.

What a maladaptive perspective.

If you want to use LLMs effectively, everything OP said is true. It has been this way since the beginning. There will be a time when long context and compaction will be effective, but now isn't it.

That you would think to ask this shows how out of touch you are.

The vast majority of people wouldn't think twice if that was the trade-off to get connected.

We should be talking instead of governmental oversight, and whether it makes sense to restrict/regulate satellite constellations for science or culture activities.

I think there should be regulation, but clearly the people and the market wants this, so it's going to happen.

And there is regulation. SpaceX works with astronomers and their satellites are coated to reduce glare and use of sun visors for example.

Billionaires are not responsible for this, we the people are. Market forces and society chose this.

You are emotionally disregulated and unable to think critically.

Your second sentence was unnecessary and unproductive and undermined your first point.

I agree with you. I still stand by the statement because it was a neutral observation that should be stated.

Many people are too morally outraged to think straight anymore, as plainly demonstrated, but who can blame them. Hope they take it as a gentle nudge for them get out of the outrage cycle.

> a Chinese model it would not have gotten the same attention

Well, you would be wrong.

Interesting point I guess, much to consider

Consider actually searching for GLM or other top Chinese models and see how many upvotes they have been getting.

Your claim that Chinese models don’t get as much attention is easily proven false.

This was one of the most famous open graph theory problems lol. I am not a mathematician and even I ran into this when doing generative map design for game dev.

The only thing you've demonstrated here is some very funny confidently incorrect coping behavior.

It's RF vision, it let's you visualize RF sources as a coloured blob overlay in real time.

Do you really think families waste half of what they buy at Costco?

Come on now.

I said nothing about that. But there are tipping points where buying too much is actually wasteful.