The AI technofacists building these systems have explicitly said they’ve hit a wall. They’re having to invest in their own power plants just to run these models. They have scores of racks of GPUs, so they’re dependent upon the silicon market. AI isn’t becoming “ever more capable,” it’s merely pushing the limits of what they have left.

While I agree that this paper sounds like a freshman thesis, I think you’re betraying your own lack of knowledge here.

Because no, they havent said they’ve hit a wall, and while there are reasons to be skeptical of the brute force scaling approach that a lot of companies are taking, those companies are doing that because they have massive amounts of capital and scaling is an easy way to spend capital to improve the results of your model while your researchers figure out how to make better models, leaving you in a better market position when the next breakthrough or advancement happens.

The reasoning models of today like o1 and Claude 3.7 are substantially more capable than the faster models that predate them, and while you can make an argument that the resource / speed trade off isn’t worth it, they’re also the very first generation of models that are trying to integrate LLMs into a more logical reasoning framework.

This is on top of the broader usage of AI that is rapidly becoming more capable. The fuzzy pattern matching techniques that LLMs use have literally already revolutionized fields like Protein Structural Analysis, all the result of a single targeted DeepMind project.

The techniques behind AI allow computers to solve whole new classes of problems that werent possible before, dismissing that is just putting your head in the sand.

And yes companies are still dependent on silicon and energy, which is why they’re vertically integrating and starting to try and produce that on their own. That’s not a sign that they see AI as a waste of time.

And to make sure that everyone is portrayed by glen powell

Do you have any resources by any chance that explain the difference well?

I work in high level software, so understand the benefit of doing things at ide time vs compile time vs runtime, and I’ve coded in assembly back in the day and understand instruction sets at a very rough level, but I’m not really familiar with specifically what differentiates RISC / ARM / x64, or why RISC’s reductions would be good / bad / what trade-offs come with them.

You say “marketing person” or “marketing quote” as if that means nothing - reporting factual information from them is standard practice in all news. Maybe there should be literally nothing posted by any news website in the world then?

Bruh, do all the news sources you read just repost marketing statements? I don’t think you realize what an own-goal that statement is.

Journalism involves reporting on true information, including determining whether or not information is true, or likely to be true, it’s not just reposting corporate fluff.

In fact, why even post reviews? Obviously nobody wants marketing fluff like “phone has 12GB RAM”, those damn capitalist corporations are faking that too, there’s only one person in this world who’s woke enough to understand that. These idiots should realise that [phone 2025] is obviously going to be better than [phone 2024]. Maybe those scrubs should realise that before writing a sham of an article.

Here’s a fun fact for you: there’s a fundamental difference between reposting a claim someone else made, and evaluating and testing something and making your own claim about it.

So it does quote someone who’s quote you are going to ignore because you don’t like it. Genius, absolutely genius.

No, I’m ignoring it because the author of the piece is trying to get engineering, manufacturing, and costing information about multiple different products from multiple different brands, based on an off hand comment made by a marketing person from one of them about one of their products.

Yes because the author is obligated to report this when writing the article by going undercover as a Chinese defector, working up from the factories, becoming CEO of China and then finally putting this information out to public. Who would have thought becoming an Android news reporter requires such sacrifice. No wonder no one wants to work in this field.

Maybe “Android News Reporter” isn’t a job that attracts the best and brightest from journalism school.

It has information on THREE brands with three different technologies attempting to make a change, with information about multiple variables about why they think they can replace Corning. I didn’t realise the author had to create a new Wikipedia before putting this out. Maybe he should’ve started a GoFundMe?

No, it has “information” that three brands are sometimes not using Gorilla Glass in some of their phones, it then has a marketing fluff quote from one of them.

Lmfao bro,

article CLEARLY states and in house glasses are SIGNIFICANTLY more expensive than Gorilla Glass for some manufacturers.

no man, it does not. It quotes a single Chinese manufacturer’s spokesperson who said that off hand about a single type of screen. It has no information on whether or not that’s actually true for Honor, it has no information about whether or not that would be true if they produced their screens at the same scale as Corning or whether they expect production to get cheaper, and it doesn’t mention anything about literally any of the other brands or any of the the other in-house screen technologies in use.

This is a nothing article with no real substantive information or answer to the question.

The answer is undoubtedly 1. cost, and/or 2. trade war.

1. As the article notes, Gorilla Glass is expensive, companies would rather not pay for it and use older versions in cheaper phones, quite frankly this is a plausible enough of a reason to not even bother writing the “article”.

2. If the author had wanted to spend another minute thinking about it before posting, they might’ve realized that Corning is an American company, and Chinese smartphone makers might be hedging their bets and investing in in-house / in-country alternatives in case they get cut off by the petulant child of a country that is America.

But let’s take your example. I’m willing to accept the premise that movie prices have kept pace with wages (they haven’t, due to the varying pay standards you pointed out, but I’ll assume for the sake of argument).

Yes, but the point is that movies are primarily made in California, so if California raises its minimum wages, then the cost of making movies goes up, and so the cost the consumer would experience at the end is increased. If you live in California and your government increased minimum wage that’s not a big deal, but the issue is arising because some states haven’t raised minimum wage to keep up with inflation, so consumers there see a real cost increase that California consumers don’t.

But at a fundamental level, the problem there is not with California raising their minimum wage to try and keep up with inflation / cost of living, but with the other states for not raising theirs. Those states are effectively artificially lowering labour costs, which makes their consumers pay effectively more for imported goods, so that businesses in the state can be more profitable.

If a state does that to support home grown businesses that keep profits in the hands of workers, that can be a path for establishing an industry that will sustain itself and enrich the state, but in most US states, the companies that benefit are big corporations that funnel the profits to the executives and investors (often out of state) rather than average people, so the average worker is just poorer for no reason and sees inflated costs everywhere.

But yes, overall I generally agree with you that the increased costs people are complaining about are real, just that those costs aren’t the result of the movie industry being greedy, so much as they’re the result of the state level governments and corporations that campaign against minimum wage increases.

I don’t have historical pricing on movies theatre snacks available off hand, but I would be willing to bet money their pricing is 100% consistent with what it was 15-20 years ago as well.

Movie theatre popcorn and drinks have always been over priced (at least in my lifetime) and have always been where theatres recoup a ton of costs.

If anything, these days theatres shouldn’t have to charge quite as much for popcorn now that they can make money selling alcohol and food and such as well (at least where I’m at, you can now buy beers and cocktails at the theatres).

The outdated social stuff comes up occasionally but like maybe there’s an issue once a season or so, it’s not going to be distracting episode to episode.

The bigger problem with Friends imho, is the laugh track. It’s just weird watching a show with a laugh track these days, especially when modern comedies have learned to use that time to cram in way more jokes. It just makes friends feel somewhat archaic and out of time, even compared to Seinfeld which objectively looks much older from a cinematography standpoint.

I think that’s an issue with whatever State / jurisdiction you’re in.

When I was a teenager it was ~$12 to get a normal (non-VIP ticket) at the big multiplex and minimum wage was $9.50 / hr.

Nowadays it’s $20 to get a normal (non-VIP ticket) at the big multiplex and minimum wage is $17.50.

Literally almost identical, if anything it’s actually slightly more affordable now. I think what you’re describing is entirely an issue with your state government not making sure its citizens are paid fairly, not an issue with the movie theatre industry and their pricing.

What a waste of time. Both the article and the researchers.

Literally by the time their research was published, it was using irrelevant models, on top of the fact that, yeah, that’s how LLMs work. That would be obvious from 5m of using them.

Oh yes of course, the whole world has of course been watching the mass protests and general strike being organized with baited breath, oh wait.

Removed by mod

Come on doc, you’ve gotta help us, we’ve tried nothing and we’re all out of ideas!

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

Jesus fucking christ. If you do this, and exploit Ukraine while they are literally under the gun, the US will be dead to the rest of the western world.

I cannot express how hard you can go fuck yourselves.

The literal rest of my life will be spent trying to fuck over America and Americans. Fuck you, you selfish, coward, pieces of shit.

Yes, but I would point out that:

a) a bunch of those commercially supported Foss projects still started out as a personal project of one of a small handful of programmers that then got popular and exploded.

b) more importantly yes, a lot of commercially useful FOSS is developed by paid developers working at tech companies as part of their line of work, stuff like browsers, languages, frameworks, packages, etc. but a lot of the most iconic and beloved consumer facing FOSS applications are not, as at that point if theyre non exploitative then there’s no reason for a corporation to support or build on them. Corporations prefer to support Foss infrastructure that’s so general they can still use it to build closed exploitative projects.

One aspect of FOSS that most people don’t appreciate is how it’s funded. Like how it’s actually funded.

Once you put a dollar value to the hours put into it, it fairly quickly becomes apparent that most FOSS projects are basically only possible because super rich software engineers (relative to the average person) have the relative luxury to be able to dedicate a ton of free time and effort to building something they think should exist.

It’s why there was a huge FOSS boom after the dot com crash when a ton of software engineers suddenly got laid off but were relatively wealthy enough to not have massive pressure to immediately start grinding a 9-5 again.