[–] 4 points 4 months ago

It was the third straight trading day of declines for a company that just 10 days ago orchestrated the largest IPO ever.

At Monday’s closing price of $154.60, average investors who bought SpaceX shares on the open market after its debut have now seen most of their gains disappear, market data shows.

The company itself — and holders of its previously privately held shares — made more than $85 billion in the initial public offering.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago

    your manager isn’t going to the LLM to ask what the fuck broke and why the fuck he’s awake after 3 hours of sleep.

    My manager actually does that, even for mid-day outages when the whole team is available. He just prefers to ask a chatbot instead of his own staff 🙄

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 10 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    I dislike the framing of age restrictions as an "experiment" or "starting point". Legally-mandated age gates are extremely high-risk and abuse prone, and target something that has (for better or worse) become the primary hub of communication and knowledge for many people. Rushing into this (or "experimenting" as the author put it) is unbelievably reckless.

  • source
  • [–] 21 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Each chip runs ONE model, hardwired into the transistors.

    That's... that's an ASIC. That's literally just an ASIC... with all the tradeoffs and compromises that come with it.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    Ethics and rights aside, this isn't even possible to comply with. The law applies to additive and subtractive manufacturing hardware, and expects it to automatically detect and refuse any attempts to manufacture a firearm. But that depends on an underlying assumption that a machine can answer the question "will this command (set) result in the construction of a gun?" And that assumption is false.

    Even if you somehow designed an algorithm that could read a G-code program and determine whether it produces something shaped like a gun, it still wouldn't be enough - because the CNC machine is just one step of a manufacturing process. The human operator controls what materials and commands go into the machine, so they also have full control over all inputs that the "oversight" program is allowed to see.

    Some simple ways to bypass this (hypothetical and perfect implementation):

    • Print the gun in two pieces, then combine them manually.
    • Print something that contains a gun, then cut out all the non-gun material.
    • Use multiple separate machines for different parts of the gun.
    • Design something that looks nothing like any existing gun, but is still capable of firing a bullet.
    • Print most of a gun, the build the rest by hand.
    • Build part of a gun, then print the rest onto the hand-made parts.
    • Print part of a gun, then run a separate program to print the rest onto the previous result.
    • A thousand variants of the above.

    So even if this was something we wanted to enforce, it's just not possible. For the same reason why Minecraft abandoned their plans for an SMP "penis detector", this law could never be complied with because it's impossible to build a machine that actually meets the requirements.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago

    I cannot emphasize enough how much you are actually going to be ordering a pizza. Please do not be surprised when you receive a pizza and a corresponding charge to your credit card.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Validating output should be much easier than generating it yourself. P≠NP.

    This is very much not true in some domains, like software development. Code is much harder to read than it is to write, so verifying the output of a coding AI usually takes more time (or at least more cognitive effort) than if you'd just written the code yourself.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • view more: next ›