He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
I think you're a fucking loony, TBH
Fair enough. In which case, most of us on PB are probably loonies.
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
You have the worst case of Musk Derangement Syndrome I have ever seen. It is so bad it is compelling. I feel like @SandyRentool's friend who went to Bradford to study congenital deformities
If you go back on PB far enough, you will see that I was a big fan of Musk before many had heard of him. But then Ashlee Vance's book came out, and there were warning signs. Then the diver paedo nonsense, and many other things. I'm not deranged; I'm just pointing out the hype does not match the reality. Which is difficult when low-IQ idiots feel he is a genius.
But most of all: Musk lies. He lies a lot. And people excuse those lies because he is a HERO. But they are still lies.
He has achieved a massive amount. But somehow, I think I might be happier than him. Or you, for that matter.
Theres probably guys living in Nepal with a fraction of your wealth who are a lot happier than you. Living in that wonderful landscape.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
I think you're a fucking loony, TBH
Fair enough. In which case, most of us on PB are probably loonies.
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
I think you're a fucking loony, TBH
Fair enough. In which case, most of us on PB are probably loonies.
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
I think you're a fucking loony, TBH
Fair enough. In which case, most of us on PB are probably loonies.
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
You are a LOONY. Go for another run, weirdo
Probably the mosr exciting thing hes done all week.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
I think you're a fucking loony, TBH
Fair enough. In which case, most of us on PB are probably loonies.
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
You are a LOONY. Go for another run, weirdo
Again, you seem to think running - even marathon running - is a *bad* thing. Something to be criticised, whereas drug taking and shagging prostitutes is laudable.
"See that bloke over there? He hit his wife repeatedly?" "Yeah, so what? See that bloke at that table? He RUNS MARATHONS... Worse than Hitler, runners are..."
I might suggest that this is a problem with your reality rather than mine.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
His remarkable engineering success hardly places his opinions beyond criticism, though.
His success is not so much engineering as in getting things from TRL-3/4 to TRL-9. Which is a whole mess of engineering/politics/finance/team building.
This is, incidentally, one of the areas that the UK has a long term problems with doing.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
I think you're a fucking loony, TBH
Fair enough. In which case, most of us on PB are probably loonies.
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
Yes but the ladies like men like that.
*Some* ladies, perhaps. Others, oddly, do not.
But you are increasingly sounding like SeanT's alter-ego.
Theory: the best countries are those run by a combination of East Asians and the English
You have the discipline and education of east Asians married to the liberal principles and free trade of England. Result: Singapore
Yes and Hong Kong. I generally like East Asians pretty intelligent generally though maybe a little too conformist.
Hong Kong is a tragedy
The British created so many of the greatest cities in the world. From New York to Sydney. From Toronto to Cape Town. And two of the brightest jewels were Singapore and Hong Kong. Amazing places
Now the stupid Chinese commies have fucked up Hong kong. Twats
The crazy thing is they could have kept it, on the surface, as it was and used it as a great tool in global finance and intelligence but they just couldn’t help themselves. It’s like everything they are doing that ultimately isn’t good for them and they can’t see it because some bullshit thinking.
They could pull the rug from Russia and be seen as the great country stopping bad shit and bask in good relations with the US and Europe and their spending power, they could have hammered Iran over the Houthis damaging trade routes as ultimately China needs to send goods west cheaply. They play silly games which will only really damage them more than others who are more flexible.
Agreed. They could easily have persuaded Putin to withdraw from Ukraine in 2022.
Had they done so, everyone would have praised Xi and it would have done China's image on the world stage no harm at all. It would have been much harder to put forward a strongly anti-China line as everyone would see Xi as a peacemaker.
He could also precipitate change in North Korea but his political instincts (such as they are) don't see the overarching benefits of de-escalation.
I think Xi is so busy playing 4 dimensional chess that he hasn’t realised everyone else plays croquet.
This is not a spoiler but the early chapters of 3 body problem gives an insight into the horror of civil strife during the Cultural Revolution. It has to be remembered that this was in the life time of the current Chinese leadership. They know better than anyone on the planet how dangerous and frightening disorder can be. It’s not surprising this makes them so authoritarian and prone to clamping down violently. Somewhere between 1 and 2 million died and tens of millions more suffered terrible hardship.
There will hopefully come a time when the life experience of their leaders and their middle classes will be different but that is going to take a lot of forgetting.
In the original Chinese, the Cultural Revolution chapters come later in the first book. The author was worried about being censored, so hid them a little.
The thing that worries me when watching those scenes in the TV version is how much it reminded me of the MAGA Trump cult. Reality is irrelevant: you just have to follow the party.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He spends more time on Twitter than most of us spend here!
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
Theory: the best countries are those run by a combination of East Asians and the English
You have the discipline and education of east Asians married to the liberal principles and free trade of England. Result: Singapore
Yes and Hong Kong. I generally like East Asians pretty intelligent generally though maybe a little too conformist.
Hong Kong is a tragedy
The British created so many of the greatest cities in the world. From New York to Sydney. From Toronto to Cape Town. And two of the brightest jewels were Singapore and Hong Kong. Amazing places
Now the stupid Chinese commies have fucked up Hong kong. Twats
The crazy thing is they could have kept it, on the surface, as it was and used it as a great tool in global finance and intelligence but they just couldn’t help themselves. It’s like everything they are doing that ultimately isn’t good for them and they can’t see it because some bullshit thinking.
They could pull the rug from Russia and be seen as the great country stopping bad shit and bask in good relations with the US and Europe and their spending power, they could have hammered Iran over the Houthis damaging trade routes as ultimately China needs to send goods west cheaply. They play silly games which will only really damage them more than others who are more flexible.
Agreed. They could easily have persuaded Putin to withdraw from Ukraine in 2022.
Had they done so, everyone would have praised Xi and it would have done China's image on the world stage no harm at all. It would have been much harder to put forward a strongly anti-China line as everyone would see Xi as a peacemaker.
He could also precipitate change in North Korea but his political instincts (such as they are) don't see the overarching benefits of de-escalation.
I think Xi is so busy playing 4 dimensional chess that he hasn’t realised everyone else plays croquet.
This is not a spoiler but the early chapters of 3 body problem gives an insight into the horror of civil strife during the Cultural Revolution. It has to be remembered that this was in the life time of the current Chinese leadership. They know better than anyone on the planet how dangerous and frightening disorder can be. It’s not surprising this makes them so authoritarian and prone to clamping down violently. Somewhere between 1 and 2 million died and tens of millions more suffered terrible hardship.
There will hopefully come a time when the life experience of their leaders and their middle classes will be different but that is going to take a lot of forgetting.
In the original Chinese, the Cultural Revolution chapters come later in the first book. The author was worried about being censored, so hid them a little.
The thing that worries me when watching those scenes in the TV version is how much it reminded me of the MAGA Trump cult. Reality is irrelevant: you just have to follow the party.
It's not just the Cultural Revolution. Chinese history is a series of
1) Get fucked over by foreigners 2) Chaos 3) Civil wars 4) Quieter bits where things were slightly better.
Which is a powerful sell for "Uniform Plastic Han Kulture + obedience to the One Party."
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
I think you're a fucking loony, TBH
Fair enough. In which case, most of us on PB are probably loonies.
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
I didn't think we'd find something to agree on, @JosiasJessop, but it seems we have. Darker. Yes.
You've followed Leon's obsession with torture, murder, Aztec knives, murder, hanging around with soldiers getting off on how many human beings they've killed, murder, torture, murder made as painful as possible both for the victims and for those who love them, murder that imprints as hard as possible on the world, torture, and knives?
Boasting about his taste in sandwiches or his superior way of cleaning his arse is annoying and perhaps clinically interesting but it's not as dark.
A novel by Sean Thomas called "The Genesis Secret" lays the "theory" bare. I wonder if the author sent a copy to Ian Brady. Or maybe Colin Wilson did. See the theory of the "king rat".
Three weeks from now I'll be heading for bed in Santiago de Compostela the night before starting my walk to France
According to the internet, well prepared and experienced hikers should take thirty days to do the walk
I want to do it in twenty days
That's how good Royal Mail is
Isn't that the wrong way round? You're gonna get fed up saying hello to everyone coming the other way.
And all the guides assume that you actually want to enjoy these walks. Talk to people, drink wine, decent night sleep. Pathetic really. 800km in 20 days. That's more like it.
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
Theory: the best countries are those run by a combination of East Asians and the English
You have the discipline and education of east Asians married to the liberal principles and free trade of England. Result: Singapore
Yes and Hong Kong. I generally like East Asians pretty intelligent generally though maybe a little too conformist.
Hong Kong is a tragedy
The British created so many of the greatest cities in the world. From New York to Sydney. From Toronto to Cape Town. And two of the brightest jewels were Singapore and Hong Kong. Amazing places
Now the stupid Chinese commies have fucked up Hong kong. Twats
The crazy thing is they could have kept it, on the surface, as it was and used it as a great tool in global finance and intelligence but they just couldn’t help themselves. It’s like everything they are doing that ultimately isn’t good for them and they can’t see it because some bullshit thinking.
They could pull the rug from Russia and be seen as the great country stopping bad shit and bask in good relations with the US and Europe and their spending power, they could have hammered Iran over the Houthis damaging trade routes as ultimately China needs to send goods west cheaply. They play silly games which will only really damage them more than others who are more flexible.
Agreed. They could easily have persuaded Putin to withdraw from Ukraine in 2022.
Had they done so, everyone would have praised Xi and it would have done China's image on the world stage no harm at all. It would have been much harder to put forward a strongly anti-China line as everyone would see Xi as a peacemaker.
He could also precipitate change in North Korea but his political instincts (such as they are) don't see the overarching benefits of de-escalation.
I think Xi is so busy playing 4 dimensional chess that he hasn’t realised everyone else plays croquet.
This is not a spoiler but the early chapters of 3 body problem gives an insight into the horror of civil strife during the Cultural Revolution. It has to be remembered that this was in the life time of the current Chinese leadership. They know better than anyone on the planet how dangerous and frightening disorder can be. It’s not surprising this makes them so authoritarian and prone to clamping down violently. Somewhere between 1 and 2 million died and tens of millions more suffered terrible hardship.
There will hopefully come a time when the life experience of their leaders and their middle classes will be different but that is going to take a lot of forgetting.
In the original Chinese, the Cultural Revolution chapters come later in the first book. The author was worried about being censored, so hid them a little.
The thing that worries me when watching those scenes in the TV version is how much it reminded me of the MAGA Trump cult. Reality is irrelevant: you just have to follow the party.
One of the things that made Jo Jo Rabbit so good was that it captured the absolute absurdity of the Nazi system and ideology while showing *some* of the horror.
Without spoilers - the scene when the children are showing the Gestapo men the anti-semitic cartoon book. Just after the... shoes scene.
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
Startling to think this mentality still exists. (URL is possibly misleading, though. It seems from other reports one photo was taken with and one without, rather than a Photoshop job?)
'A photographer working for Tempest Photography took separate pictures of the P5 class at Aboyne primary school in Aberdeenshire, with the children with additional needs reportedly removed from one set. Parents were then sent a link with both versions to choose from.
It was reported that a set of twins was split up so that the child who uses a wheelchair was excluded from one version.'
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
I’d be willing to bet that not one single person on PB will lose their job in the next year because of AI.
Maybe not on PB, not in the next year, but that's just cause we are all middle aged or old and doing OK, in general, those that aren't retired are usually pretty senior, and will be the last to go
But young people will definitely lose their jobs within the next 12 months, and within 5-10 years everyone in cognitive work will lose their jobs. Why would they not? Capitalism demands profit, AI means you can do everything cheaper
There may be a Luddite revolution when we smash all the robots (and that really might happen) but absent that, we are fucked. Dull witted and conformist lab scientists are not long for this world, sorry
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
Dont you wanna walk on the wild side like Leon.
I've walked as much on the 'wild side' as I want to, thanks. I'm 51 now, and am happy playing with my son, reading books, and trying to achieve my own little modest goals in life.
What's not to like about that?
There's some variant of the Micawber principle here I reckon, balancing life goals with ability to attain said ambitions. The art of good living being to know when to push on and when to stop.
And yes, important parts of human progress have come from unreasonable individuals like Musk not knowing when to stop. (Though possibly fewer than Great Man Theory would have us think.) But other unreasonable individuals given power have used it to create human misery.
In any case, Musk's undoubted technical triumphs don't mean that he has any particular reason to be heard on other themes. And a sucessful liar with poor manners is still a liar with poor manners.
Startling to think this mentality still exists. (URL is possibly misleading, though. It seems from other reports one photo was taken with and one without, rather than a Photoshop job?)
'A photographer working for Tempest Photography took separate pictures of the P5 class at Aboyne primary school in Aberdeenshire, with the children with additional needs reportedly removed from one set. Parents were then sent a link with both versions to choose from.
It was reported that a set of twins was split up so that the child who uses a wheelchair was excluded from one version.'
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
I think you're a fucking loony, TBH
Fair enough. In which case, most of us on PB are probably loonies.
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
I didn't think we'd find something to agree on, @JosiasJessop, but it seems we have. Darker. Yes.
You've followed Leon's obsession with torture, murder, Aztec knives, murder, hanging around with soldiers getting off on how many human beings they've killed, murder, torture, murder made as painful as possible both for the victims and for those who love them, murder that imprints as hard as possible on the world, torture, and knives?
Boasting about his taste in sandwiches or his superior way of cleaning his arse is annoying and perhaps clinically interesting but it's not as dark.
A novel by Sean Thomas called "The Genesis Secret" lays the "theory" bare. I wonder if the author sent a copy to Ian Brady. Or maybe Colin Wilson did. See the theory of the "king rat".
Three weeks from now I'll be heading for bed in Santiago de Compostela the night before starting my walk to France
According to the internet, well prepared and experienced hikers should take thirty days to do the walk
I want to do it in twenty days
That's how good Royal Mail is
Isn't that the wrong way round? You're gonna get fed up saying hello to everyone coming the other way.
And all the guides assume that you actually want to enjoy these walks. Talk to people, drink wine, decent night sleep. Pathetic really. 800km in 20 days. That's more like it.
I'm pretty sure that I'll find people to talk to and wine to drink
And I'll sleep better than the twenty seven km per day pussies
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
Speaking seriously, as I've mentioned previously I intended to write a series about ideas of our time (transhumanism, solarpunk, anarcho-capitalism, etc) and started to do the reading for it. But each article would have taken me about three-four months to do so I abandoned it in favour of the Measurement series which isn't as good but is far faster
So here's my question: can I use AI to speed this up?
If I fed about four or five reviews of a concept, the concept itself, the Wikipedia article and some other gubbins and said "AI, please write me a 800-1200 word article detailing the concept of Thing based on this input", can I do that? Do I have to instal an AI or can I just open an account with BigAICorp (soon to be BigAICorpX) to do it? What's the copyright sitiuation?
There's stuff I really want to do. Lenin's State and Revolution. Kaczynski's Industrial Society and Its Future. The entire National Conservatism 2023 conference. If I can shortcut the read-understand-digest-type process and reduce the turnaround time from months to hours/days, it will really speed things up.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
Dont you wanna walk on the wild side like Leon.
I've walked as much on the 'wild side' as I want to, thanks. I'm 51 now, and am happy playing with my son, reading books, and trying to achieve my own little modest goals in life.
What's not to like about that?
There's some variant of the Micawber principle here I reckon, balancing life goals with ability to attain said ambitions. The art of good living being to know when to push on and when to stop.
And yes, important parts of human progress have come from unreasonable individuals like Musk not knowing when to stop. (Though possibly fewer than Great Man Theory would have us think.) But other unreasonable individuals given power have used it to create human misery.
In any case, Musk's undoubted technical triumphs don't mean that he has any particular reason to be heard on other themes. And a sucessful liar with poor manners is still a liar with poor manners.
Well, that's what I am saying
Should we go to Musk for political opinions? Of course not, possibly the opposite, everything he says and does indicates he is quite peculiar and his socio-political views are no better informed (possibly worse) than the average PB-er
But for an opinion on technological progress, especially AI? Er, yeah, he is THE MAN. Tesla is basically trying to create an AI car and he is a founder member of OpenAI, and he has a track record - beyond imagining - of creating new tech companies that shake the world. He is the dude, on this subject, and he knows everyone, and he has all the data in his his weird hair-restored head, and he thinks we will achieve AGI in 2025 and ASI by 2029
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
I’d be willing to bet that not one single person on PB will lose their job in the next year because of AI.
Instead they will lose it because they were hanging out on PB rather than working.
But in this @Leon is absolutely right: there will be massive turnover of people due to AI. The amount of work for friendly local solicitors is going to absolutely collapse, because so much of their work will be able to be automated. Now, that doesn't mean there will be no work - but as it will dramatically ease the writing (and analyzing) of contracts, the work of conveyencing, etc., it will mean that there will be fewer solicitors needed.
Now, will it affect demand for plumbers or cooks or waiters or hairdressers? No. But it is coming for a whole host of white collar workers jobs.
It will also dramatically increase the speed of technological innovation. Smaller programming teams can do more.
I was talking with my wife about why there's no universal database of artists work by museum. And I realized, given a month or so (which I don't have), and the various AI tools out there, I could pull something together. Search Van Gogh's by city. Where do I need to go to see the most pieces by Frida Kahlo etc.
It's like the steam engine, but for the mind. It's an incredible force multiplier, and those who know how to use it will be massive beneficiaries. But there are going to be whole industries that get crucified.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
Dont you wanna walk on the wild side like Leon.
I've walked as much on the 'wild side' as I want to, thanks. I'm 51 now, and am happy playing with my son, reading books, and trying to achieve my own little modest goals in life.
What's not to like about that?
There's some variant of the Micawber principle here I reckon, balancing life goals with ability to attain said ambitions. The art of good living being to know when to push on and when to stop.
And yes, important parts of human progress have come from unreasonable individuals like Musk not knowing when to stop. (Though possibly fewer than Great Man Theory would have us think.) But other unreasonable individuals given power have used it to create human misery.
In any case, Musk's undoubted technical triumphs don't mean that he has any particular reason to be heard on other themes. And a sucessful liar with poor manners is still a liar with poor manners.
"‘The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.’" - George Bernard Shaw.
I'm generally a positive person, which helps. I've never particularly encountered the Black Dog. But I think what helps more is that, when I was a teenager, I faced health issues, and was told I would never walk properly again. I lucked out, fluked into finding a brilliant surgeon, and after a decade and many operations got fixed. I can walk down the street without pain and think: "Life is good!"
My teens and early twenties were not particularly good for me; which means that, in some ways, I count my blessings every day. I have a beautiful and intelligent wife; a wonderful son, no mortgage, money in the bank and investments, and my health. Any of those could change negatively any day, so why not count my blessing now? There are millions of people who don't have any of the above.
I've had some sh*t happen in my life, but I've ended up in a good position, and happy. Some of that was luck, admittedly.
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
Speaking seriously, as I've mentioned previously I intended to write a series about ideas of our time (transhumanism, solarpunk, anarcho-capitalism, etc) and started to do the reading for it. But each article would have taken me about three-four months to do so I abandoned it in favour of the Measurement series which isn't as good but is far faster
So here's my question: can I use AI to speed this up?
If I fed about four or five reviews of a concept, the concept itself, the Wikipedia article and some other gubbins and said "AI, please write me a 800-1200 word article detailing the concept of Thing based on this input", can I do that? Do I have to instal an AI or can I just open an account with BigAICorp (soon to be BigAICorpX) to do it? What's the copyright sitiuation?
There's stuff I really want to do. Lenin's State and Revolution. Kaczynski's Industrial Society and Its Future. The entire National Conservatism 2023 conference. If I can shortcut the read-understand-digest-type process and reduce the turnaround time from months to hours/days, it will really speed things up.
You’d need an account with ChatGPT probably, but, yes, you can give it an input and tell it to summarise it. How good a job will it do… possibly no better than you’d get just by reading the Wikipedia articles for those things!
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
I think you're a fucking loony, TBH
Fair enough. In which case, most of us on PB are probably loonies.
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
I didn't think we'd find something to agree on, @JosiasJessop, but it seems we have. Darker. Yes.
You've followed Leon's obsession with torture, murder, Aztec knives, murder, hanging around with soldiers getting off on how many human beings they've killed, murder, torture, murder made as painful as possible both for the victims and for those who love them, murder that imprints as hard as possible on the world, torture, and knives?
Boasting about his taste in sandwiches or his superior way of cleaning his arse is annoying and perhaps clinically interesting but it's not as dark.
A novel by Sean Thomas called "The Genesis Secret" lays the "theory" bare. I wonder if the author sent a copy to Ian Brady. Or maybe Colin Wilson did. See the theory of the "king rat".
Enjoy your evening, JJ!
You do realise that I LOVE attention, right?
You do? This changes EVERYTHING. I now understand why you post the drivel you post.
Although I did here sonething positive about what3words today. Someone on the radio recommending it to travellers as apparently 1 in 5 who breakdown do not know where they are. Maybe it has a future after all?
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
I’d be willing to bet that not one single person on PB will lose their job in the next year because of AI.
Instead they will lose it because they were hanging out on PB rather than working.
But in this @Leon is absolutely right: there will be massive turnover of people due to AI. The amount of work for friendly local solicitors is going to absolutely collapse, because so much of their work will be able to be automated. Now, that doesn't mean there will be no work - but as it will dramatically ease the writing (and analyzing) of contracts, the work of conveyencing, etc., it will mean that there will be fewer solicitors needed.
Now, will it affect demand for plumbers or cooks or waiters or hairdressers? No. But it is coming for a whole host of white collar workers jobs.
It will also dramatically increase the speed of technological innovation. Smaller programming teams can do more.
I was talking with my wife about why there's no universal database of artists work by museum. And I realized, given a month or so (which I don't have), and the various AI tools out there, I could pull something together. Search Van Gogh's by city. Where do I need to go to see the most pieces by Frida Kahlo etc.
It's like the steam engine, but for the mind. It's an incredible force multiplier, and those who know how to use it will be massive beneficiaries. But there are going to be whole industries that get crucified.
I'm a little more bearish on ML / AI than you, but your art comment leads me to an interesting thought: how well would AI tell fake paintings from real ones, and how could you test this for unknown fakes?
My guess is poorly, as it seems experts rely on more than just a picture of the painting to determine authenticity - and the AI may find it hard to explain its reasoning.
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
I’d be willing to bet that not one single person on PB will lose their job in the next year because of AI.
Maybe not on PB, not in the next year, but that's just cause we are all middle aged or old and doing OK, in general, those that aren't retired are usually pretty senior, and will be the last to go
But young people will definitely lose their jobs within the next 12 months, and within 5-10 years everyone in cognitive work will lose their jobs. Why would they not? Capitalism demands profit, AI means you can do everything cheaper
There may be a Luddite revolution when we smash all the robots (and that really might happen) but absent that, we are fucked. Dull witted and conformist lab scientists are not long for this world, sorry
I am eagerly awaiting AI to solve the service charge problem on flats.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
Dont you wanna walk on the wild side like Leon.
I've walked as much on the 'wild side' as I want to, thanks. I'm 51 now, and am happy playing with my son, reading books, and trying to achieve my own little modest goals in life.
What's not to like about that?
There's some variant of the Micawber principle here I reckon, balancing life goals with ability to attain said ambitions. The art of good living being to know when to push on and when to stop.
And yes, important parts of human progress have come from unreasonable individuals like Musk not knowing when to stop. (Though possibly fewer than Great Man Theory would have us think.) But other unreasonable individuals given power have used it to create human misery.
In any case, Musk's undoubted technical triumphs don't mean that he has any particular reason to be heard on other themes. And a sucessful liar with poor manners is still a liar with poor manners.
Well, that's what I am saying
Should we go to Musk for political opinions? Of course not, possibly the opposite, everything he says and does indicates he is quite peculiar and his socio-political views are no better informed (possibly worse) than the average PB-er
But for an opinion on technological progress, especially AI? Er, yeah, he is THE MAN. Tesla is basically trying to create an AI car and he is a founder member of OpenAI, and he has a track record - beyond imagining - of creating new tech companies that shake the world. He is the dude, on this subject, and he knows everyone, and he has all the data in his his weird hair-restored head, and he thinks we will achieve AGI in 2025 and ASI by 2029
Ignoring this is not just foolish, it is an error
Sure, but there's also no way that AI compute demand can grow at 100x a year, because it's already about 6-8% of data center capacity. That means it would require data center capacity to increase 6x in a year, which is physically impossible, simply from a infrastructure perspective.
YES! It is going to grow incredibly quickly (AI compute power demand). But those chips need to be made somewhere. Those computers need power and air conditioning and network cards etc. So, that 100x is going to slow to 2x pretty damn quickly, not because the demand isn't there, but because in the real world there are hard physical limits (like semiconductor fabrication capacity) that are hard to work around.
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
Dont you wanna walk on the wild side like Leon.
I've walked as much on the 'wild side' as I want to, thanks. I'm 51 now, and am happy playing with my son, reading books, and trying to achieve my own little modest goals in life.
What's not to like about that?
There's some variant of the Micawber principle here I reckon, balancing life goals with ability to attain said ambitions. The art of good living being to know when to push on and when to stop.
And yes, important parts of human progress have come from unreasonable individuals like Musk not knowing when to stop. (Though possibly fewer than Great Man Theory would have us think.) But other unreasonable individuals given power have used it to create human misery.
In any case, Musk's undoubted technical triumphs don't mean that he has any particular reason to be heard on other themes. And a sucessful liar with poor manners is still a liar with poor manners.
"‘The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.’" - George Bernard Shaw.
I'm generally a positive person, which helps. I've never particularly encountered the Black Dog. But I think what helps more is that, when I was a teenager, I faced health issues, and was told I would never walk properly again. I lucked out, fluked into finding a brilliant surgeon, and after a decade and many operations got fixed. I can walk down the street without pain and think: "Life is good!"
My teens and early twenties were not particularly good for me; which means that, in some ways, I count my blessings every day. I have a beautiful and intelligent wife; a wonderful son, no mortgage, money in the bank and investments, and my health. Any of those could change negatively any day, so why not count my blessing now? There are millions of people who don't have any of the above.
I've had some sh*t happen in my life, but I've ended up in a good position, and happy. Some of that was luck, admittedly.
Good for you. Seriously. Just drop the unprompted ad hom attacks, it's not a great move
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
I’d be willing to bet that not one single person on PB will lose their job in the next year because of AI.
Instead they will lose it because they were hanging out on PB rather than working.
But in this @Leon is absolutely right: there will be massive turnover of people due to AI. The amount of work for friendly local solicitors is going to absolutely collapse, because so much of their work will be able to be automated. Now, that doesn't mean there will be no work - but as it will dramatically ease the writing (and analyzing) of contracts, the work of conveyencing, etc., it will mean that there will be fewer solicitors needed.
Now, will it affect demand for plumbers or cooks or waiters or hairdressers? No. But it is coming for a whole host of white collar workers jobs.
It will also dramatically increase the speed of technological innovation. Smaller programming teams can do more.
I was talking with my wife about why there's no universal database of artists work by museum. And I realized, given a month or so (which I don't have), and the various AI tools out there, I could pull something together. Search Van Gogh's by city. Where do I need to go to see the most pieces by Frida Kahlo etc.
It's like the steam engine, but for the mind. It's an incredible force multiplier, and those who know how to use it will be massive beneficiaries. But there are going to be whole industries that get crucified.
I'm a little more bearish on ML / AI than you, but your art comment leads me to an interesting thought: how well would AI tell fake paintings from real ones, and how could you test this for unknown fakes?
My guess is poorly, as it seems experts rely on more than just a picture of the painting to determine authenticity - and the AI may find it hard to explain its reasoning.
Well, authenticity is a matter of long-term record keeping. A new Rembrandt or Van Gogh is 99.9% likely to be a fake. Make that 99.999%.
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
Speaking seriously, as I've mentioned previously I intended to write a series about ideas of our time (transhumanism, solarpunk, anarcho-capitalism, etc) and started to do the reading for it. But each article would have taken me about three-four months to do so I abandoned it in favour of the Measurement series which isn't as good but is far faster
So here's my question: can I use AI to speed this up?
If I fed about four or five reviews of a concept, the concept itself, the Wikipedia article and some other gubbins and said "AI, please write me a 800-1200 word article detailing the concept of Thing based on this input", can I do that? Do I have to instal an AI or can I just open an account with BigAICorp (soon to be BigAICorpX) to do it? What's the copyright sitiuation?
There's stuff I really want to do. Lenin's State and Revolution. Kaczynski's Industrial Society and Its Future. The entire National Conservatism 2023 conference. If I can shortcut the read-understand-digest-type process and reduce the turnaround time from months to hours/days, it will really speed things up.
I've no idea, but sign up to this and you will find out
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
I’d be willing to bet that not one single person on PB will lose their job in the next year because of AI.
Instead they will lose it because they were hanging out on PB rather than working.
But in this @Leon is absolutely right: there will be massive turnover of people due to AI. The amount of work for friendly local solicitors is going to absolutely collapse, because so much of their work will be able to be automated. Now, that doesn't mean there will be no work - but as it will dramatically ease the writing (and analyzing) of contracts, the work of conveyencing, etc., it will mean that there will be fewer solicitors needed.
Now, will it affect demand for plumbers or cooks or waiters or hairdressers? No. But it is coming for a whole host of white collar workers jobs.
It will also dramatically increase the speed of technological innovation. Smaller programming teams can do more.
I was talking with my wife about why there's no universal database of artists work by museum. And I realized, given a month or so (which I don't have), and the various AI tools out there, I could pull something together. Search Van Gogh's by city. Where do I need to go to see the most pieces by Frida Kahlo etc.
It's like the steam engine, but for the mind. It's an incredible force multiplier, and those who know how to use it will be massive beneficiaries. But there are going to be whole industries that get crucified.
When I started at Bath I ran a lot of samples for users of the instruments I have. Over the years the automation has improved beyond measure, and most stuff is now done via automation, including things that would have needed significant input from me just a few years ago. So do I now work less hours? Nope. I do different things, and have been promoted on the basis of that. Work changes. People adapt. If they don’t then there will be casualties.
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
Speaking seriously, as I've mentioned previously I intended to write a series about ideas of our time (transhumanism, solarpunk, anarcho-capitalism, etc) and started to do the reading for it. But each article would have taken me about three-four months to do so I abandoned it in favour of the Measurement series which isn't as good but is far faster
So here's my question: can I use AI to speed this up?
If I fed about four or five reviews of a concept, the concept itself, the Wikipedia article and some other gubbins and said "AI, please write me a 800-1200 word article detailing the concept of Thing based on this input", can I do that? Do I have to instal an AI or can I just open an account with BigAICorp (soon to be BigAICorpX) to do it? What's the copyright sitiuation?
There's stuff I really want to do. Lenin's State and Revolution. Kaczynski's Industrial Society and Its Future. The entire National Conservatism 2023 conference. If I can shortcut the read-understand-digest-type process and reduce the turnaround time from months to hours/days, it will really speed things up.
You’d need an account with ChatGPT probably, but, yes, you can give it an input and tell it to summarise it. How good a job will it do… possibly no better than you’d get just by reading the Wikipedia articles for those things!
You've never tried Claude, have you? I suspect you've never even heard of it
So much of this discourse is betweeen effete liberal left dullards, like you and @turbotubbs, who actually have no clue what they are talking about, and imagine it is all some fantasy land, bizarrely tinged with Trumpite beliefs because of Musk
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
I’d be willing to bet that not one single person on PB will lose their job in the next year because of AI.
Instead they will lose it because they were hanging out on PB rather than working.
But in this @Leon is absolutely right: there will be massive turnover of people due to AI. The amount of work for friendly local solicitors is going to absolutely collapse, because so much of their work will be able to be automated. Now, that doesn't mean there will be no work - but as it will dramatically ease the writing (and analyzing) of contracts, the work of conveyencing, etc., it will mean that there will be fewer solicitors needed.
Now, will it affect demand for plumbers or cooks or waiters or hairdressers? No. But it is coming for a whole host of white collar workers jobs.
It will also dramatically increase the speed of technological innovation. Smaller programming teams can do more.
I was talking with my wife about why there's no universal database of artists work by museum. And I realized, given a month or so (which I don't have), and the various AI tools out there, I could pull something together. Search Van Gogh's by city. Where do I need to go to see the most pieces by Frida Kahlo etc.
It's like the steam engine, but for the mind. It's an incredible force multiplier, and those who know how to use it will be massive beneficiaries. But there are going to be whole industries that get crucified.
I'm a little more bearish on ML / AI than you, but your art comment leads me to an interesting thought: how well would AI tell fake paintings from real ones, and how could you test this for unknown fakes?
My guess is poorly, as it seems experts rely on more than just a picture of the painting to determine authenticity - and the AI may find it hard to explain its reasoning.
Well, authenticity is a matter of long-term record keeping. A new Rembrandt or Van Gogh is 99.9% likely to be a fake. Make that 99.999%.
I'm not sure AI adds much here.
Many are not 'new' finds, but paintings that have been known about for years: see Fake or Fortune, or preferably the truly excellent Bendor Grosvenor in "Britain's Lost Masterpieces". In the latter, he finds painting in museums that have been misattributed, often going by hunches based on style and flourishes.
Could ML learn an artists particular artistic fingerprints from 'known' paintings, and use those to search through other paintings, as Bendor does? It'd certainly be an interesting test.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
Dont you wanna walk on the wild side like Leon.
I've walked as much on the 'wild side' as I want to, thanks. I'm 51 now, and am happy playing with my son, reading books, and trying to achieve my own little modest goals in life.
What's not to like about that?
There's some variant of the Micawber principle here I reckon, balancing life goals with ability to attain said ambitions. The art of good living being to know when to push on and when to stop.
And yes, important parts of human progress have come from unreasonable individuals like Musk not knowing when to stop. (Though possibly fewer than Great Man Theory would have us think.) But other unreasonable individuals given power have used it to create human misery.
In any case, Musk's undoubted technical triumphs don't mean that he has any particular reason to be heard on other themes. And a sucessful liar with poor manners is still a liar with poor manners.
Well, that's what I am saying
Should we go to Musk for political opinions? Of course not, possibly the opposite, everything he says and does indicates he is quite peculiar and his socio-political views are no better informed (possibly worse) than the average PB-er
But for an opinion on technological progress, especially AI? Er, yeah, he is THE MAN. Tesla is basically trying to create an AI car and he is a founder member of OpenAI, and he has a track record - beyond imagining - of creating new tech companies that shake the world. He is the dude, on this subject, and he knows everyone, and he has all the data in his his weird hair-restored head, and he thinks we will achieve AGI in 2025 and ASI by 2029
Ignoring this is not just foolish, it is an error
Sure, but there's also no way that AI compute demand can grow at 100x a year, because it's already about 6-8% of data center capacity. That means it would require data center capacity to increase 6x in a year, which is physically impossible, simply from a infrastructure perspective.
YES! It is going to grow incredibly quickly (AI compute power demand). But those chips need to be made somewhere. Those computers need power and air conditioning and network cards etc. So, that 100x is going to slow to 2x pretty damn quickly, not because the demand isn't there, but because in the real world there are hard physical limits (like semiconductor fabrication capacity) that are hard to work around.
Saw this today
"Microsoft, OpenAI plan $100 billion data-center project, media report says"
Just a casual $100bn
Whoever gets to AGI first will reap trilliions, it will get done
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
I think you're a fucking loony, TBH
Fair enough. In which case, most of us on PB are probably loonies.
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
I didn't think we'd find something to agree on, @JosiasJessop, but it seems we have. Darker. Yes.
You've followed Leon's obsession with torture, murder, Aztec knives, murder, hanging around with soldiers getting off on how many human beings they've killed, murder, torture, murder made as painful as possible both for the victims and for those who love them, murder that imprints as hard as possible on the world, torture, and knives?
Boasting about his taste in sandwiches or his superior way of cleaning his arse is annoying and perhaps clinically interesting but it's not as dark.
A novel by Sean Thomas called "The Genesis Secret" lays the "theory" bare. I wonder if the author sent a copy to Ian Brady. Or maybe Colin Wilson did. See the theory of the "king rat".
Enjoy your evening, JJ!
You do realise that I LOVE attention, right?
You do? This changes EVERYTHING. I now understand why you post the drivel you post.
Although I did here sonething positive about what3words today. Someone on the radio recommending it to travellers as apparently 1 in 5 who breakdown do not know where they are. Maybe it has a future after all?
If they do not know where they are how do they know what.three.words to use?
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
I’d be willing to bet that not one single person on PB will lose their job in the next year because of AI.
Instead they will lose it because they were hanging out on PB rather than working.
But in this @Leon is absolutely right: there will be massive turnover of people due to AI. The amount of work for friendly local solicitors is going to absolutely collapse, because so much of their work will be able to be automated. Now, that doesn't mean there will be no work - but as it will dramatically ease the writing (and analyzing) of contracts, the work of conveyencing, etc., it will mean that there will be fewer solicitors needed.
Now, will it affect demand for plumbers or cooks or waiters or hairdressers? No. But it is coming for a whole host of white collar workers jobs.
It will also dramatically increase the speed of technological innovation. Smaller programming teams can do more.
I was talking with my wife about why there's no universal database of artists work by museum. And I realized, given a month or so (which I don't have), and the various AI tools out there, I could pull something together. Search Van Gogh's by city. Where do I need to go to see the most pieces by Frida Kahlo etc.
It's like the steam engine, but for the mind. It's an incredible force multiplier, and those who know how to use it will be massive beneficiaries. But there are going to be whole industries that get crucified.
When I started at Bath I ran a lot of samples for users of the instruments I have. Over the years the automation has improved beyond measure, and most stuff is now done via automation, including things that would have needed significant input from me just a few years ago. So do I now work less hours? Nope. I do different things, and have been promoted on the basis of that. Work changes. People adapt. If they don’t then there will be casualties.
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
Speaking seriously, as I've mentioned previously I intended to write a series about ideas of our time (transhumanism, solarpunk, anarcho-capitalism, etc) and started to do the reading for it. But each article would have taken me about three-four months to do so I abandoned it in favour of the Measurement series which isn't as good but is far faster
So here's my question: can I use AI to speed this up?
If I fed about four or five reviews of a concept, the concept itself, the Wikipedia article and some other gubbins and said "AI, please write me a 800-1200 word article detailing the concept of Thing based on this input", can I do that? Do I have to instal an AI or can I just open an account with BigAICorp (soon to be BigAICorpX) to do it? What's the copyright sitiuation?
There's stuff I really want to do. Lenin's State and Revolution. Kaczynski's Industrial Society and Its Future. The entire National Conservatism 2023 conference. If I can shortcut the read-understand-digest-type process and reduce the turnaround time from months to hours/days, it will really speed things up.
You’d need an account with ChatGPT probably, but, yes, you can give it an input and tell it to summarise it. How good a job will it do… possibly no better than you’d get just by reading the Wikipedia articles for those things!
You've never tried Claude, have you? I suspect you've never even heard of it
So much of this discourse is betweeen effete liberal left dullards, like you and @turbotubbs, who actually have no clue what they are talking about, and imagine it is all some fantasy land, bizarrely tinged with Trumpite beliefs because of Musk
It isn't. Your stupid job is done for. Good
Liberal left? Nope. Never voted liberal in my life.
I’ve tried Chatgpt. It was shit. I expect Claude is vastly better, but my job/role is more than just churning out text. We will use these tools. That’s what we do with tools. I get why your worried. Even Chatgpt is good enough at fluff pieces for travel journalists.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
Dont you wanna walk on the wild side like Leon.
I've walked as much on the 'wild side' as I want to, thanks. I'm 51 now, and am happy playing with my son, reading books, and trying to achieve my own little modest goals in life.
What's not to like about that?
There's some variant of the Micawber principle here I reckon, balancing life goals with ability to attain said ambitions. The art of good living being to know when to push on and when to stop.
And yes, important parts of human progress have come from unreasonable individuals like Musk not knowing when to stop. (Though possibly fewer than Great Man Theory would have us think.) But other unreasonable individuals given power have used it to create human misery.
In any case, Musk's undoubted technical triumphs don't mean that he has any particular reason to be heard on other themes. And a sucessful liar with poor manners is still a liar with poor manners.
"‘The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.’" - George Bernard Shaw.
I'm generally a positive person, which helps. I've never particularly encountered the Black Dog. But I think what helps more is that, when I was a teenager, I faced health issues, and was told I would never walk properly again. I lucked out, fluked into finding a brilliant surgeon, and after a decade and many operations got fixed. I can walk down the street without pain and think: "Life is good!"
My teens and early twenties were not particularly good for me; which means that, in some ways, I count my blessings every day. I have a beautiful and intelligent wife; a wonderful son, no mortgage, money in the bank and investments, and my health. Any of those could change negatively any day, so why not count my blessing now? There are millions of people who don't have any of the above.
I've had some sh*t happen in my life, but I've ended up in a good position, and happy. Some of that was luck, admittedly.
Good for you. Seriously. Just drop the unprompted ad hom attacks, it's not a great move
I hate to remind you, but you called me a 'cuck', or cuckold, a while back. Something that insulted not jsut me, but my wife. And something she found laughable but insulting. You also routinely insult other posters.
So before you go on about ad homs, I might suggest you take your own advice.
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
I think you're a fucking loony, TBH
Fair enough. In which case, most of us on PB are probably loonies.
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
I didn't think we'd find something to agree on, @JosiasJessop, but it seems we have. Darker. Yes.
You've followed Leon's obsession with torture, murder, Aztec knives, murder, hanging around with soldiers getting off on how many human beings they've killed, murder, torture, murder made as painful as possible both for the victims and for those who love them, murder that imprints as hard as possible on the world, torture, and knives?
Boasting about his taste in sandwiches or his superior way of cleaning his arse is annoying and perhaps clinically interesting but it's not as dark.
A novel by Sean Thomas called "The Genesis Secret" lays the "theory" bare. I wonder if the author sent a copy to Ian Brady. Or maybe Colin Wilson did. See the theory of the "king rat".
Enjoy your evening, JJ!
You do realise that I LOVE attention, right?
You do? This changes EVERYTHING. I now understand why you post the drivel you post.
Although I did here sonething positive about what3words today. Someone on the radio recommending it to travellers as apparently 1 in 5 who breakdown do not know where they are. Maybe it has a future after all?
If they do not know where they are how do they know what.three.words to use?
The app on their phone tells them. I mean no one knows the three word location without looking at the app.
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
I’d be willing to bet that not one single person on PB will lose their job in the next year because of AI.
Instead they will lose it because they were hanging out on PB rather than working.
But in this @Leon is absolutely right: there will be massive turnover of people due to AI. The amount of work for friendly local solicitors is going to absolutely collapse, because so much of their work will be able to be automated. Now, that doesn't mean there will be no work - but as it will dramatically ease the writing (and analyzing) of contracts, the work of conveyencing, etc., it will mean that there will be fewer solicitors needed.
Now, will it affect demand for plumbers or cooks or waiters or hairdressers? No. But it is coming for a whole host of white collar workers jobs.
It will also dramatically increase the speed of technological innovation. Smaller programming teams can do more.
I was talking with my wife about why there's no universal database of artists work by museum. And I realized, given a month or so (which I don't have), and the various AI tools out there, I could pull something together. Search Van Gogh's by city. Where do I need to go to see the most pieces by Frida Kahlo etc.
It's like the steam engine, but for the mind. It's an incredible force multiplier, and those who know how to use it will be massive beneficiaries. But there are going to be whole industries that get crucified.
I’ve been wondering if it could be a game changer for criminal justice. You could massively increase the number of people who are on ankle tags by virtue of AI being able to monitor everyone in minute detail.
The AI justice machine knows where you are living, knows where you are working, it knows you are only allowed to leave the house to go to work and by a set route. You don’t get to go on jollies. You stray and an AI calls you and reminds you that you have a few minutes to get back on track before it alerts the police.
Offenders get to live at home, not breaking up families. They get to go to work so remain a useful member of society. They are kept out of jail to spiral into crime and meeting other crims.
They are punished because they can’t have a normal life so it’s a hard lesson.
The state wins by not having to house prisoners and employ thousands to watch and control them and benefits from people continuing work and family life.
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
I’d be willing to bet that not one single person on PB will lose their job in the next year because of AI.
Instead they will lose it because they were hanging out on PB rather than working.
But in this @Leon is absolutely right: there will be massive turnover of people due to AI. The amount of work for friendly local solicitors is going to absolutely collapse, because so much of their work will be able to be automated. Now, that doesn't mean there will be no work - but as it will dramatically ease the writing (and analyzing) of contracts, the work of conveyencing, etc., it will mean that there will be fewer solicitors needed.
Now, will it affect demand for plumbers or cooks or waiters or hairdressers? No. But it is coming for a whole host of white collar workers jobs.
It will also dramatically increase the speed of technological innovation. Smaller programming teams can do more.
I was talking with my wife about why there's no universal database of artists work by museum. And I realized, given a month or so (which I don't have), and the various AI tools out there, I could pull something together. Search Van Gogh's by city. Where do I need to go to see the most pieces by Frida Kahlo etc.
It's like the steam engine, but for the mind. It's an incredible force multiplier, and those who know how to use it will be massive beneficiaries. But there are going to be whole industries that get crucified.
I'm a little more bearish on ML / AI than you, but your art comment leads me to an interesting thought: how well would AI tell fake paintings from real ones, and how could you test this for unknown fakes?
My guess is poorly, as it seems experts rely on more than just a picture of the painting to determine authenticity - and the AI may find it hard to explain its reasoning.
Well, authenticity is a matter of long-term record keeping. A new Rembrandt or Van Gogh is 99.9% likely to be a fake. Make that 99.999%.
I'm not sure AI adds much here.
Point of order: proving authenticity usually relies on long-term records but authenticity itself is independent of said records.
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
I’d be willing to bet that not one single person on PB will lose their job in the next year because of AI.
Instead they will lose it because they were hanging out on PB rather than working.
But in this @Leon is absolutely right: there will be massive turnover of people due to AI. The amount of work for friendly local solicitors is going to absolutely collapse, because so much of their work will be able to be automated. Now, that doesn't mean there will be no work - but as it will dramatically ease the writing (and analyzing) of contracts, the work of conveyencing, etc., it will mean that there will be fewer solicitors needed.
Now, will it affect demand for plumbers or cooks or waiters or hairdressers? No. But it is coming for a whole host of white collar workers jobs.
It will also dramatically increase the speed of technological innovation. Smaller programming teams can do more.
I was talking with my wife about why there's no universal database of artists work by museum. And I realized, given a month or so (which I don't have), and the various AI tools out there, I could pull something together. Search Van Gogh's by city. Where do I need to go to see the most pieces by Frida Kahlo etc.
It's like the steam engine, but for the mind. It's an incredible force multiplier, and those who know how to use it will be massive beneficiaries. But there are going to be whole industries that get crucified.
I'm a little more bearish on ML / AI than you, but your art comment leads me to an interesting thought: how well would AI tell fake paintings from real ones, and how could you test this for unknown fakes?
My guess is poorly, as it seems experts rely on more than just a picture of the painting to determine authenticity - and the AI may find it hard to explain its reasoning.
Well, authenticity is a matter of long-term record keeping. A new Rembrandt or Van Gogh is 99.9% likely to be a fake. Make that 99.999%.
I'm not sure AI adds much here.
Many are not 'new' finds, but paintings that have been known about for years: see Fake or Fortune, or preferably the truly excellent Bendor Grosvenor in "Britain's Lost Masterpieces". In the latter, he finds painting in museums that have been misattributed, often going by hunches based on style and flourishes.
Could ML learn an artists particular artistic fingerprints from 'known' paintings, and use those to search through other paintings, as Bendor does? It'd certainly be an interesting test.
That I do think is interesting - not least because it is one of those areas where the human gatekeepers of the catalogue raisonné will brutally repel invaders.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
I think you're a fucking loony, TBH
Fair enough. In which case, most of us on PB are probably loonies.
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
I didn't think we'd find something to agree on, @JosiasJessop, but it seems we have. Darker. Yes.
You've followed Leon's obsession with torture, murder, Aztec knives, murder, hanging around with soldiers getting off on how many human beings they've killed, murder, torture, murder made as painful as possible both for the victims and for those who love them, murder that imprints as hard as possible on the world, torture, and knives?
Boasting about his taste in sandwiches or his superior way of cleaning his arse is annoying and perhaps clinically interesting but it's not as dark.
A novel by Sean Thomas called "The Genesis Secret" lays the "theory" bare. I wonder if the author sent a copy to Ian Brady. Or maybe Colin Wilson did. See the theory of the "king rat".
Enjoy your evening, JJ!
You do realise that I LOVE attention, right?
You do? This changes EVERYTHING. I now understand why you post the drivel you post.
Although I did here sonething positive about what3words today. Someone on the radio recommending it to travellers as apparently 1 in 5 who breakdown do not know where they are. Maybe it has a future after all?
If they do not know where they are how do they know what.three.words to use?
The app on their phone tells them. I mean no one knows the three word location without looking at the app.
Well if they have a smartphone, they have a map that tells them where they are; what.three.words is irrelevant.
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
I’d be willing to bet that not one single person on PB will lose their job in the next year because of AI.
Instead they will lose it because they were hanging out on PB rather than working.
But in this @Leon is absolutely right: there will be massive turnover of people due to AI. The amount of work for friendly local solicitors is going to absolutely collapse, because so much of their work will be able to be automated. Now, that doesn't mean there will be no work - but as it will dramatically ease the writing (and analyzing) of contracts, the work of conveyencing, etc., it will mean that there will be fewer solicitors needed.
Now, will it affect demand for plumbers or cooks or waiters or hairdressers? No. But it is coming for a whole host of white collar workers jobs.
It will also dramatically increase the speed of technological innovation. Smaller programming teams can do more.
I was talking with my wife about why there's no universal database of artists work by museum. And I realized, given a month or so (which I don't have), and the various AI tools out there, I could pull something together. Search Van Gogh's by city. Where do I need to go to see the most pieces by Frida Kahlo etc.
It's like the steam engine, but for the mind. It's an incredible force multiplier, and those who know how to use it will be massive beneficiaries. But there are going to be whole industries that get crucified.
I’ve been wondering if it could be a game changer for criminal justice. You could massively increase the number of people who are on ankle tags by virtue of AI being able to monitor everyone in minute detail.
The AI justice machine knows where you are living, knows where you are working, it knows you are only allowed to leave the house to go to work and by a set route. You don’t get to go on jollies. You stray and an AI calls you and reminds you that you have a few minutes to get back on track before it alerts the police.
Offenders get to live at home, not breaking up families. They get to go to work so remain a useful member of society. They are kept out of jail to spiral into crime and meeting other crims.
They are punished because they can’t have a normal life so it’s a hard lesson.
The state wins by not having to house prisoners and employ thousands to watch and control them and benefits from people continuing work and family life.
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
I’d be willing to bet that not one single person on PB will lose their job in the next year because of AI.
Instead they will lose it because they were hanging out on PB rather than working.
But in this @Leon is absolutely right: there will be massive turnover of people due to AI. The amount of work for friendly local solicitors is going to absolutely collapse, because so much of their work will be able to be automated. Now, that doesn't mean there will be no work - but as it will dramatically ease the writing (and analyzing) of contracts, the work of conveyencing, etc., it will mean that there will be fewer solicitors needed.
Now, will it affect demand for plumbers or cooks or waiters or hairdressers? No. But it is coming for a whole host of white collar workers jobs.
It will also dramatically increase the speed of technological innovation. Smaller programming teams can do more.
I was talking with my wife about why there's no universal database of artists work by museum. And I realized, given a month or so (which I don't have), and the various AI tools out there, I could pull something together. Search Van Gogh's by city. Where do I need to go to see the most pieces by Frida Kahlo etc.
It's like the steam engine, but for the mind. It's an incredible force multiplier, and those who know how to use it will be massive beneficiaries. But there are going to be whole industries that get crucified.
I'm a little more bearish on ML / AI than you, but your art comment leads me to an interesting thought: how well would AI tell fake paintings from real ones, and how could you test this for unknown fakes?
My guess is poorly, as it seems experts rely on more than just a picture of the painting to determine authenticity - and the AI may find it hard to explain its reasoning.
Well, authenticity is a matter of long-term record keeping. A new Rembrandt or Van Gogh is 99.9% likely to be a fake. Make that 99.999%.
I'm not sure AI adds much here.
Many are not 'new' finds, but paintings that have been known about for years: see Fake or Fortune, or preferably the truly excellent Bendor Grosvenor in "Britain's Lost Masterpieces". In the latter, he finds painting in museums that have been misattributed, often going by hunches based on style and flourishes.
Could ML learn an artists particular artistic fingerprints from 'known' paintings, and use those to search through other paintings, as Bendor does? It'd certainly be an interesting test.
That I do think is interesting - not least because it is one of those areas where the human gatekeepers of the catalogue raisonné will brutally repel invaders.
ISTR there was one where the expert asked to have his first viewing of the painting with its reverse towards him, as you could tell a great deal from the back of a painting, and he would get distracted by preconceptions if he saw the actual painting first.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
Dont you wanna walk on the wild side like Leon.
I've walked as much on the 'wild side' as I want to, thanks. I'm 51 now, and am happy playing with my son, reading books, and trying to achieve my own little modest goals in life.
What's not to like about that?
There's some variant of the Micawber principle here I reckon, balancing life goals with ability to attain said ambitions. The art of good living being to know when to push on and when to stop.
And yes, important parts of human progress have come from unreasonable individuals like Musk not knowing when to stop. (Though possibly fewer than Great Man Theory would have us think.) But other unreasonable individuals given power have used it to create human misery.
In any case, Musk's undoubted technical triumphs don't mean that he has any particular reason to be heard on other themes. And a sucessful liar with poor manners is still a liar with poor manners.
"‘The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.’" - George Bernard Shaw.
I'm generally a positive person, which helps. I've never particularly encountered the Black Dog. But I think what helps more is that, when I was a teenager, I faced health issues, and was told I would never walk properly again. I lucked out, fluked into finding a brilliant surgeon, and after a decade and many operations got fixed. I can walk down the street without pain and think: "Life is good!"
My teens and early twenties were not particularly good for me; which means that, in some ways, I count my blessings every day. I have a beautiful and intelligent wife; a wonderful son, no mortgage, money in the bank and investments, and my health. Any of those could change negatively any day, so why not count my blessing now? There are millions of people who don't have any of the above.
I've had some sh*t happen in my life, but I've ended up in a good position, and happy. Some of that was luck, admittedly.
Good for you. Seriously. Just drop the unprompted ad hom attacks, it's not a great move
I hate to remind you, but you called me a 'cuck', or cuckold, a while back. Something that insulted not jsut me, but my wife. And something she found laughable but insulting. You also routinely insult other posters.
So before you go on about ad homs, I might suggest you take your own advice.
Ohhkayy, someone needs to end this discourse on a gentlemanly note
I am sorry you had a bad time as a kid, and a young adult. You strike me as a thoughtful and sensitive person. I imagine - believe it or not - we would probably get on over a pint. I am much nicer than my prickly online persona, I come here for arguments, I don't do that in real life. I think that is probably true of most of us, here on PB, we come on here to debate and argue, freeing our precious family and friends from our insistent opinions
God bless you, your wife, and your child. God speed you all. Pax
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
It's travel hacks that can be replaced easily by AI.
Some things that we all thought were difficult will turn out to be pretty easy to automate with AI, whereas others won't. Oh, to be able to work out which ones are which. I suspect that there are some things that humans do that we think are creative, but are really pattern matching across a small mental database. Or throwing out lots of possibilities, and seeing which one sticks to the wall. That sort of thing is very AI-vulnerable. And that's a largeish part of what we're seeing right now.
(Personal anecodote: a large chunk of my degree was crystallography- Crick and Watson and all that. Turned out that while I was doing that, the bits that were difficult, the maths and the visualisation, become pretty easy once you have enough computing power to throw at them. There are still humans working in the field, but they add value in other ways.)
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
Dont you wanna walk on the wild side like Leon.
I've walked as much on the 'wild side' as I want to, thanks. I'm 51 now, and am happy playing with my son, reading books, and trying to achieve my own little modest goals in life.
What's not to like about that?
There's some variant of the Micawber principle here I reckon, balancing life goals with ability to attain said ambitions. The art of good living being to know when to push on and when to stop.
And yes, important parts of human progress have come from unreasonable individuals like Musk not knowing when to stop. (Though possibly fewer than Great Man Theory would have us think.) But other unreasonable individuals given power have used it to create human misery.
In any case, Musk's undoubted technical triumphs don't mean that he has any particular reason to be heard on other themes. And a sucessful liar with poor manners is still a liar with poor manners.
"‘The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.’" - George Bernard Shaw.
I'm generally a positive person, which helps. I've never particularly encountered the Black Dog. But I think what helps more is that, when I was a teenager, I faced health issues, and was told I would never walk properly again. I lucked out, fluked into finding a brilliant surgeon, and after a decade and many operations got fixed. I can walk down the street without pain and think: "Life is good!"
My teens and early twenties were not particularly good for me; which means that, in some ways, I count my blessings every day. I have a beautiful and intelligent wife; a wonderful son, no mortgage, money in the bank and investments, and my health. Any of those could change negatively any day, so why not count my blessing now? There are millions of people who don't have any of the above.
I've had some sh*t happen in my life, but I've ended up in a good position, and happy. Some of that was luck, admittedly.
Good for you. Seriously. Just drop the unprompted ad hom attacks, it's not a great move
I hate to remind you, but you called me a 'cuck', or cuckold, a while back. Something that insulted not jsut me, but my wife. And something she found laughable but insulting. You also routinely insult other posters.
So before you go on about ad homs, I might suggest you take your own advice.
Ohhkayy, someone needs to end this discourse on a gentlemanly note
I am sorry you had a bad time as a kid, and a young adult. You strike me as a thoughtful and sensitive person. I imagine - believe it or not - we would probably get on over a pint. I am much nicer than my prickly online persona, I come here for arguments, I don't do that in real life. I think that is probably true of most of us, here on PB, we come on here to debate and argue, freeing our precious family and friends from our insistent opinions
God bless you, your wife, and your child. God speed you all. Pax
I think 99% of us are different from our online personae; if only because most people are nice; nuances are harder to express online, and it's much harder to insult someone facre-to-face.
So yes, pax. Have a great evening. It's past my bedtime, and we're going to a little archaeological exhibition tomorrow morning...
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
It's travel hacks that can be replaced easily by AI.
Ironically, we will probably be the last to go. Robots can't sip cocktails in the Seychelles. Soz
This is likely why I have an entire year full of travel gigs
AI doesn't need to sip cocktails, just write about them.
I think your year of travel gigs simply shows that AI isn't going to be replacing people any time soon.
Honest opinion? Yes it is displacing writers already. And this will only get worse. There is panic in the industry, amongst those who are paying attention - news journalists are first, who depend on info rather than style or persona, then follow on from there
But yes, weirdly, travel writers might be the last to go, indeed they might survive entirely, as a robot can never replace the personal human experience
This will be the writing that survives. The human stuff. All else will be overtaken. It is pretty grim, to be honest, if you extrapolate - all the good, fun jobs will be taken. This is not what we were promised
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
I think you're a fucking loony, TBH
Fair enough. In which case, most of us on PB are probably loonies.
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
I didn't think we'd find something to agree on, @JosiasJessop, but it seems we have. Darker. Yes.
You've followed Leon's obsession with torture, murder, Aztec knives, murder, hanging around with soldiers getting off on how many human beings they've killed, murder, torture, murder made as painful as possible both for the victims and for those who love them, murder that imprints as hard as possible on the world, torture, and knives?
Boasting about his taste in sandwiches or his superior way of cleaning his arse is annoying and perhaps clinically interesting but it's not as dark.
A novel by Sean Thomas called "The Genesis Secret" lays the "theory" bare. I wonder if the author sent a copy to Ian Brady. Or maybe Colin Wilson did. See the theory of the "king rat".
Enjoy your evening, JJ!
You do realise that I LOVE attention, right?
You do? This changes EVERYTHING. I now understand why you post the drivel you post.
Although I did here sonething positive about what3words today. Someone on the radio recommending it to travellers as apparently 1 in 5 who breakdown do not know where they are. Maybe it has a future after all?
If they do not know where they are how do they know what.three.words to use?
The app on their phone tells them. I mean no one knows the three word location without looking at the app.
Well if they have a smartphone, they have a map that tells them where they are; what.three.words is irrelevant.
Tbf the rescue services, including mountain rescue find it useful. Yes you have a map on your phone, but a lot of people cannot turn that information into anything useful. What3words solves that. It’s just never lively to make anyone rich.
Schools in England accused of closing down debate on Israel-Gaza conflict Government adviser says teachers feel ill-equipped to talk about controversial topics but avoiding debate risks fuelling anger
Dame Sara Khan said that if schools continued to shut down debate they risked “fuelling further anger, hate and polarisation”.
She said the conflict, which has prompted huge demonstrations by hundreds of thousands of pro-Palestinian protesters across London and elsewhere, has had a marked impact on schools, where pupils want to talk about events in Gaza.
Days after the publication of her review into threats to social cohesion, Khan repeated her assertion that teachers were avoiding addressing controversial issues because of fears of being targeted by campaigns of intimidation and harassment.
She also said teachers felt there was too little guidance on teaching controversial issues in personal, social, health and economic (PSHE) lessons and were worried about a lack of support from the Department for Education (DfE) when difficulties arose.
Her review – which highlights the case of a religious studies teacher at Batley grammar school in West Yorkshire who was forced into hiding after accusations of blasphemy – recommends a cohesion and conflict unit be set up to support teachers who find themselves being threatened. The unit would also provide training resources to support schools on controversial topics.
The war in Gaza has caused a number of incidents in schools. In one case, Barclay primary school in Leyton, east London, sought help from the Metropolitan police to investigate threats to the school and abuse of staff after its decision to ban political symbols, including the Palestinian flag.
Although many teachers are reluctant to speak out, one secondary school teacher, who did not want to be named, told the Guardian their school was one of the few that had agreed to hold assemblies on the issue and offer a weekly safe space for discussion about the conflict.
“We’re lucky. Generally, management are terrified and teachers are terrified to discuss it. The biggest problem is the kind of silence around it in the vast majority of schools,” they said.
Another teacher in an inner-city school, who also wished to remain anonymous, said it was a “massive failing” on the part of schools. “From the word go, we were told this was a political issue and we can’t discuss it. If we’re not talking about it, it does not mean that the kids are not interested. They know what’s going on. They are going online where there’s no control over what they are seeing.”..
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
It's travel hacks that can be replaced easily by AI.
Some things that we all thought were difficult will turn out to be pretty easy to automate with AI, whereas others won't. Oh, to be able to work out which ones are which. I suspect that there are some things that humans do that we think are creative, but are really pattern matching across a small mental database. Or throwing out lots of possibilities, and seeing which one sticks to the wall. That sort of thing is very AI-vulnerable. And that's a largeish part of what we're seeing right now.
(Personal anecodote: a large chunk of my degree was crystallography- Crick and Watson and all that. Turned out that while I was doing that, the bits that were difficult, the maths and the visualisation, become pretty easy once you have enough computing power to throw at them. There are still humans working in the field, but they add value in other ways.)
Yes, some pretty impressive stuff with 3D protein structures from the amino acid sequence alone. No need to try to crystallise and analyse the X ray data. Speeds up drug discovery no end.
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
I’d be willing to bet that not one single person on PB will lose their job in the next year because of AI.
Instead they will lose it because they were hanging out on PB rather than working.
But in this @Leon is absolutely right: there will be massive turnover of people due to AI. The amount of work for friendly local solicitors is going to absolutely collapse, because so much of their work will be able to be automated. Now, that doesn't mean there will be no work - but as it will dramatically ease the writing (and analyzing) of contracts, the work of conveyencing, etc., it will mean that there will be fewer solicitors needed.
Now, will it affect demand for plumbers or cooks or waiters or hairdressers? No. But it is coming for a whole host of white collar workers jobs.
It will also dramatically increase the speed of technological innovation. Smaller programming teams can do more.
I was talking with my wife about why there's no universal database of artists work by museum. And I realized, given a month or so (which I don't have), and the various AI tools out there, I could pull something together. Search Van Gogh's by city. Where do I need to go to see the most pieces by Frida Kahlo etc.
It's like the steam engine, but for the mind. It's an incredible force multiplier, and those who know how to use it will be massive beneficiaries. But there are going to be whole industries that get crucified.
I’ve been wondering if it could be a game changer for criminal justice. You could massively increase the number of people who are on ankle tags by virtue of AI being able to monitor everyone in minute detail.
The AI justice machine knows where you are living, knows where you are working, it knows you are only allowed to leave the house to go to work and by a set route. You don’t get to go on jollies. You stray and an AI calls you and reminds you that you have a few minutes to get back on track before it alerts the police.
Offenders get to live at home, not breaking up families. They get to go to work so remain a useful member of society. They are kept out of jail to spiral into crime and meeting other crims.
They are punished because they can’t have a normal life so it’s a hard lesson.
The state wins by not having to house prisoners and employ thousands to watch and control them and benefits from people continuing work and family life.
Just by monitoring a person's movements - from said ankle bracelet - you can tell if they are inebriated. You *might* be able to get away with a single glass of wine, but beyond that... the machine knows.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
Dont you wanna walk on the wild side like Leon.
I've walked as much on the 'wild side' as I want to, thanks. I'm 51 now, and am happy playing with my son, reading books, and trying to achieve my own little modest goals in life.
What's not to like about that?
There's some variant of the Micawber principle here I reckon, balancing life goals with ability to attain said ambitions. The art of good living being to know when to push on and when to stop.
And yes, important parts of human progress have come from unreasonable individuals like Musk not knowing when to stop. (Though possibly fewer than Great Man Theory would have us think.) But other unreasonable individuals given power have used it to create human misery.
In any case, Musk's undoubted technical triumphs don't mean that he has any particular reason to be heard on other themes. And a sucessful liar with poor manners is still a liar with poor manners.
Well, that's what I am saying
Should we go to Musk for political opinions? Of course not, possibly the opposite, everything he says and does indicates he is quite peculiar and his socio-political views are no better informed (possibly worse) than the average PB-er
But for an opinion on technological progress, especially AI? Er, yeah, he is THE MAN. Tesla is basically trying to create an AI car and he is a founder member of OpenAI, and he has a track record - beyond imagining - of creating new tech companies that shake the world. He is the dude, on this subject, and he knows everyone, and he has all the data in his his weird hair-restored head, and he thinks we will achieve AGI in 2025 and ASI by 2029
Ignoring this is not just foolish, it is an error
Sure, but there's also no way that AI compute demand can grow at 100x a year, because it's already about 6-8% of data center capacity. That means it would require data center capacity to increase 6x in a year, which is physically impossible, simply from a infrastructure perspective.
YES! It is going to grow incredibly quickly (AI compute power demand). But those chips need to be made somewhere. Those computers need power and air conditioning and network cards etc. So, that 100x is going to slow to 2x pretty damn quickly, not because the demand isn't there, but because in the real world there are hard physical limits (like semiconductor fabrication capacity) that are hard to work around.
Saw this today
"Microsoft, OpenAI plan $100 billion data-center project, media report says"
Just a casual $100bn
Whoever gets to AGI first will reap trilliions, it will get done
Sure they do. But there are bottlenecks, and they aren't necessarily where you think they are.
There are only so many cutting edge chip fabrication plants in the world: no point in building the facilities if you don't have the chips. And let's say you want to build more chips. Well, there's a three or four year gap from saying "we need a new fab" to getting the first silicon out. And if everyone wants to do it at once, then there isn't enough lithography equipment for all those new fabs.
It's happening, but quite a lot of that $100bn is going to be swallowed up in cost inflation. (Which is why ASML Lithography is now the third largest company in Europe by market capitalisation.)
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
I think you're a fucking loony, TBH
Fair enough. In which case, most of us on PB are probably loonies.
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
I didn't think we'd find something to agree on, @JosiasJessop, but it seems we have. Darker. Yes.
You've followed Leon's obsession with torture, murder, Aztec knives, murder, hanging around with soldiers getting off on how many human beings they've killed, murder, torture, murder made as painful as possible both for the victims and for those who love them, murder that imprints as hard as possible on the world, torture, and knives?
Boasting about his taste in sandwiches or his superior way of cleaning his arse is annoying and perhaps clinically interesting but it's not as dark.
A novel by Sean Thomas called "The Genesis Secret" lays the "theory" bare. I wonder if the author sent a copy to Ian Brady. Or maybe Colin Wilson did. See the theory of the "king rat".
Enjoy your evening, JJ!
You do realise that I LOVE attention, right?
You do? This changes EVERYTHING. I now understand why you post the drivel you post.
Although I did here sonething positive about what3words today. Someone on the radio recommending it to travellers as apparently 1 in 5 who breakdown do not know where they are. Maybe it has a future after all?
If they do not know where they are how do they know what.three.words to use?
The app on their phone tells them. I mean no one knows the three word location without looking at the app.
True story: I once broke down in Carmarthen. I called the AA, and they sent a van to....Caernarfon
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
I think you're a fucking loony, TBH
Fair enough. In which case, most of us on PB are probably loonies.
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
I didn't think we'd find something to agree on, @JosiasJessop, but it seems we have. Darker. Yes.
You've followed Leon's obsession with torture, murder, Aztec knives, murder, hanging around with soldiers getting off on how many human beings they've killed, murder, torture, murder made as painful as possible both for the victims and for those who love them, murder that imprints as hard as possible on the world, torture, and knives?
Boasting about his taste in sandwiches or his superior way of cleaning his arse is annoying and perhaps clinically interesting but it's not as dark.
A novel by Sean Thomas called "The Genesis Secret" lays the "theory" bare. I wonder if the author sent a copy to Ian Brady. Or maybe Colin Wilson did. See the theory of the "king rat".
Enjoy your evening, JJ!
You do realise that I LOVE attention, right?
You do? This changes EVERYTHING. I now understand why you post the drivel you post.
Although I did here sonething positive about what3words today. Someone on the radio recommending it to travellers as apparently 1 in 5 who breakdown do not know where they are. Maybe it has a future after all?
If they do not know where they are how do they know what.three.words to use?
The app on their phone tells them. I mean no one knows the three word location without looking at the app.
True story: I once broke down in Carmarthen. I called the AA, and they sent a van to....Caernarfon
When I was in my teens my family were driving up to near Inverness. Dad wanted to stop at Alnwick. I found Annick and navigated there. Not my fault there is a very similar sounding named place, somewhere near by. And don’t get me started on Woolfardisworty, Happisborough and all the rest.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
I think you're a fucking loony, TBH
Fair enough. In which case, most of us on PB are probably loonies.
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
I didn't think we'd find something to agree on, @JosiasJessop, but it seems we have. Darker. Yes.
You've followed Leon's obsession with torture, murder, Aztec knives, murder, hanging around with soldiers getting off on how many human beings they've killed, murder, torture, murder made as painful as possible both for the victims and for those who love them, murder that imprints as hard as possible on the world, torture, and knives?
Boasting about his taste in sandwiches or his superior way of cleaning his arse is annoying and perhaps clinically interesting but it's not as dark.
A novel by Sean Thomas called "The Genesis Secret" lays the "theory" bare. I wonder if the author sent a copy to Ian Brady. Or maybe Colin Wilson did. See the theory of the "king rat".
Enjoy your evening, JJ!
You do realise that I LOVE attention, right?
You do? This changes EVERYTHING. I now understand why you post the drivel you post.
Although I did here sonething positive about what3words today. Someone on the radio recommending it to travellers as apparently 1 in 5 who breakdown do not know where they are. Maybe it has a future after all?
If they do not know where they are how do they know what.three.words to use?
The app on their phone tells them. I mean no one knows the three word location without looking at the app.
True story: I once broke down in Carmarthen. I called the AA, and they sent a van to....Caernarfon
Presumably they thought you were slurring your words.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
I think you're a fucking loony, TBH
Fair enough. In which case, most of us on PB are probably loonies.
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
I didn't think we'd find something to agree on, @JosiasJessop, but it seems we have. Darker. Yes.
You've followed Leon's obsession with torture, murder, Aztec knives, murder, hanging around with soldiers getting off on how many human beings they've killed, murder, torture, murder made as painful as possible both for the victims and for those who love them, murder that imprints as hard as possible on the world, torture, and knives?
Boasting about his taste in sandwiches or his superior way of cleaning his arse is annoying and perhaps clinically interesting but it's not as dark.
A novel by Sean Thomas called "The Genesis Secret" lays the "theory" bare. I wonder if the author sent a copy to Ian Brady. Or maybe Colin Wilson did. See the theory of the "king rat".
Enjoy your evening, JJ!
You do realise that I LOVE attention, right?
You do? This changes EVERYTHING. I now understand why you post the drivel you post.
Although I did here sonething positive about what3words today. Someone on the radio recommending it to travellers as apparently 1 in 5 who breakdown do not know where they are. Maybe it has a future after all?
If they do not know where they are how do they know what.three.words to use?
The app on their phone tells them. I mean no one knows the three word location without looking at the app.
True story: I once broke down in Carmarthen. I called the AA, and they sent a van to....Caernarfon
Got a puncture near ASDA Dunbar on the A1 - RAC call centre tried to dispatch a mechanic to Dundee. At least it is the same coast, I suppose.
Schools in England accused of closing down debate on Israel-Gaza conflict Government adviser says teachers feel ill-equipped to talk about controversial topics but avoiding debate risks fuelling anger
Dame Sara Khan said that if schools continued to shut down debate they risked “fuelling further anger, hate and polarisation”.
She said the conflict, which has prompted huge demonstrations by hundreds of thousands of pro-Palestinian protesters across London and elsewhere, has had a marked impact on schools, where pupils want to talk about events in Gaza.
Days after the publication of her review into threats to social cohesion, Khan repeated her assertion that teachers were avoiding addressing controversial issues because of fears of being targeted by campaigns of intimidation and harassment.
She also said teachers felt there was too little guidance on teaching controversial issues in personal, social, health and economic (PSHE) lessons and were worried about a lack of support from the Department for Education (DfE) when difficulties arose.
Her review – which highlights the case of a religious studies teacher at Batley grammar school in West Yorkshire who was forced into hiding after accusations of blasphemy – recommends a cohesion and conflict unit be set up to support teachers who find themselves being threatened. The unit would also provide training resources to support schools on controversial topics.
The war in Gaza has caused a number of incidents in schools. In one case, Barclay primary school in Leyton, east London, sought help from the Metropolitan police to investigate threats to the school and abuse of staff after its decision to ban political symbols, including the Palestinian flag.
Although many teachers are reluctant to speak out, one secondary school teacher, who did not want to be named, told the Guardian their school was one of the few that had agreed to hold assemblies on the issue and offer a weekly safe space for discussion about the conflict.
“We’re lucky. Generally, management are terrified and teachers are terrified to discuss it. The biggest problem is the kind of silence around it in the vast majority of schools,” they said.
Another teacher in an inner-city school, who also wished to remain anonymous, said it was a “massive failing” on the part of schools. “From the word go, we were told this was a political issue and we can’t discuss it. If we’re not talking about it, it does not mean that the kids are not interested. They know what’s going on. They are going online where there’s no control over what they are seeing.”..
It is funny how we didn't get this looming fear of violence over the Ukraine War. Almost like there are segments of the UK population particularly invested in the Palestine conflict that have a tendency towards extremism
THIS is what Claude 3 Opus can do, after reading a 350 page novel for FORTY FIVE SECONDS. I have a novelist friend, and she just forwarded this to me. Sit back and absorb what this means for all of us
"Based on the clues and revelations throughout the story, I believe there are a few key suspects and possibilities for what really happened to Natalie Tyack:
Malcolm Tyack: As Natalie's husband, Malcolm had the most direct access and potential motive. The photos of him stalking Natalie suggest a level of obsession and control that could have turned violent. If he discovered she was having an affair and possibly pregnant with another man's child, he might have been driven to murder in a fit of rage and jealousy.
Derek Coppinger: As the likely biological father of Natalie, Derek's relationship with her is shrouded in mystery and potential darkness. If they had an inappropriate or abusive relationship, Natalie may have threatened to expose him, leading him to silence her permanently. His connection to DCI Diana Curtis also suggests a potential police coverup.
Miles Tyack: Miles' excessive drinking and emotional instability make him a wild card. As the younger, resentful brother, he may have harbored jealousy or anger towards Natalie, especially if he felt she was a threat to the Tyack family legacy. His constant refusal to stay at Baldhu overnight is suspicious.
Supernatural forces: While I believe the hauntings at Baldhu are more likely a manifestation of inherited trauma and psychological distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that Natalie's death was somehow orchestrated by the malevolent supernatural entities that seem to plague the house. If the "ghosts" are real, they may have driven Natalie to madness or suicide.
Accident or suicide: Given Natalie's troubled past, her potential pregnancy, and the stress of living in a haunted house, it's possible that her death was a tragic accident or even a deliberate suicide. Grace's account of their final interaction suggests that Natalie was deeply distressed and possibly planning to take her own life.
Ultimately, I believe the key to unraveling the mystery lies in the tangled web of family secrets, inherited trauma, and the dark history of the Tyacks. I suspect that Natalie discovered something devastating about her own past or the Tyack family legacy, and that this knowledge put her in danger. Whether she was murdered to keep her silent or driven to take her own life, I believe the truth will be deeply rooted in the generational guilt and dysfunction of the Tyack family.
Of course, these are just my theories based on the clues presented so far. I'm eagerly awaiting the final chapters to see how you bring all the threads together and reveal the shocking truth behind Natalie's tragic fate."
I repeat, it did this in 45 seconds. It chewed up a novel, and digested it, and - minus the last few chapters - ably discussed how the book might end
What is totally fucking freaky about this is that the AI sensed this was a book hovering between a ghost story and a classic murder mystery. The intent of the author was to tread that fine and enticing line (or so she tells me)
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
I’d be willing to bet that not one single person on PB will lose their job in the next year because of AI.
Instead they will lose it because they were hanging out on PB rather than working.
But in this @Leon is absolutely right: there will be massive turnover of people due to AI. The amount of work for friendly local solicitors is going to absolutely collapse, because so much of their work will be able to be automated. Now, that doesn't mean there will be no work - but as it will dramatically ease the writing (and analyzing) of contracts, the work of conveyencing, etc., it will mean that there will be fewer solicitors needed.
Now, will it affect demand for plumbers or cooks or waiters or hairdressers? No. But it is coming for a whole host of white collar workers jobs.
It will also dramatically increase the speed of technological innovation. Smaller programming teams can do more.
I was talking with my wife about why there's no universal database of artists work by museum. And I realized, given a month or so (which I don't have), and the various AI tools out there, I could pull something together. Search Van Gogh's by city. Where do I need to go to see the most pieces by Frida Kahlo etc.
It's like the steam engine, but for the mind. It's an incredible force multiplier, and those who know how to use it will be massive beneficiaries. But there are going to be whole industries that get crucified.
I'm a little more bearish on ML / AI than you, but your art comment leads me to an interesting thought: how well would AI tell fake paintings from real ones, and how could you test this for unknown fakes?
My guess is poorly, as it seems experts rely on more than just a picture of the painting to determine authenticity - and the AI may find it hard to explain its reasoning.
Well, authenticity is a matter of long-term record keeping. A new Rembrandt or Van Gogh is 99.9% likely to be a fake. Make that 99.999%.
I'm not sure AI adds much here.
Many are not 'new' finds, but paintings that have been known about for years: see Fake or Fortune, or preferably the truly excellent Bendor Grosvenor in "Britain's Lost Masterpieces". In the latter, he finds painting in museums that have been misattributed, often going by hunches based on style and flourishes.
Could ML learn an artists particular artistic fingerprints from 'known' paintings, and use those to search through other paintings, as Bendor does? It'd certainly be an interesting test.
That I do think is interesting - not least because it is one of those areas where the human gatekeepers of the catalogue raisonné will brutally repel invaders.
One of the fascinating things in my industry is how it relies on institutional experiential memory.
Librarian or bookseller X knows that this book was once in the library of such and such, because of a neat code, binding, style that said owner used in 1725.
Junior librarian or bookseller takes over, the knowledge is lost.
It isn't written down. It is almost solely learned from experience in handling another one of those books with that code, binding, etc
It presents some tremendous opportunities when juniors in auction houses are given lots to catalogue....
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
Dont you wanna walk on the wild side like Leon.
I've walked as much on the 'wild side' as I want to, thanks. I'm 51 now, and am happy playing with my son, reading books, and trying to achieve my own little modest goals in life.
What's not to like about that?
There's some variant of the Micawber principle here I reckon, balancing life goals with ability to attain said ambitions. The art of good living being to know when to push on and when to stop.
And yes, important parts of human progress have come from unreasonable individuals like Musk not knowing when to stop. (Though possibly fewer than Great Man Theory would have us think.) But other unreasonable individuals given power have used it to create human misery.
In any case, Musk's undoubted technical triumphs don't mean that he has any particular reason to be heard on other themes. And a sucessful liar with poor manners is still a liar with poor manners.
"‘The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.’" - George Bernard Shaw.
I'm generally a positive person, which helps. I've never particularly encountered the Black Dog. But I think what helps more is that, when I was a teenager, I faced health issues, and was told I would never walk properly again. I lucked out, fluked into finding a brilliant surgeon, and after a decade and many operations got fixed. I can walk down the street without pain and think: "Life is good!"
My teens and early twenties were not particularly good for me; which means that, in some ways, I count my blessings every day. I have a beautiful and intelligent wife; a wonderful son, no mortgage, money in the bank and investments, and my health. Any of those could change negatively any day, so why not count my blessing now? There are millions of people who don't have any of the above.
I've had some sh*t happen in my life, but I've ended up in a good position, and happy. Some of that was luck, admittedly.
Good for you. Seriously. Just drop the unprompted ad hom attacks, it's not a great move
I hate to remind you, but you called me a 'cuck', or cuckold, a while back. Something that insulted not jsut me, but my wife. And something she found laughable but insulting. You also routinely insult other posters.
So before you go on about ad homs, I might suggest you take your own advice.
Ohhkayy, someone needs to end this discourse on a gentlemanly note
I am sorry you had a bad time as a kid, and a young adult. You strike me as a thoughtful and sensitive person. I imagine - believe it or not - we would probably get on over a pint. I am much nicer than my prickly online persona, I come here for arguments, I don't do that in real life. I think that is probably true of most of us, here on PB, we come on here to debate and argue, freeing our precious family and friends from our insistent opinions
God bless you, your wife, and your child. God speed you all. Pax
I think 99% of us are different from our online personae; if only because most people are nice; nuances are harder to express online, and it's much harder to insult someone facre-to-face.
So yes, pax. Have a great evening. It's past my bedtime, and we're going to a little archaeological exhibition tomorrow morning...
The statement most people are nice is rather nieve of human nature. Try competing for a property in a desirable area or competing for a promotion at work and you will see how "nice" most people really are. Not to mention the millions who went along with eg atrocities in nazi germany.
How the U.K. Became One of the Poorest Countries in Western Europe Britain chose finance over industry, austerity over investment, and a closed economy over openness to the world.
By Derek Thompson
Is that Derek Thompson who plays Charlie in Casualty or the Horse Racing presenter?
Schools in England accused of closing down debate on Israel-Gaza conflict Government adviser says teachers feel ill-equipped to talk about controversial topics but avoiding debate risks fuelling anger
Dame Sara Khan said that if schools continued to shut down debate they risked “fuelling further anger, hate and polarisation”.
She said the conflict, which has prompted huge demonstrations by hundreds of thousands of pro-Palestinian protesters across London and elsewhere, has had a marked impact on schools, where pupils want to talk about events in Gaza.
Days after the publication of her review into threats to social cohesion, Khan repeated her assertion that teachers were avoiding addressing controversial issues because of fears of being targeted by campaigns of intimidation and harassment.
She also said teachers felt there was too little guidance on teaching controversial issues in personal, social, health and economic (PSHE) lessons and were worried about a lack of support from the Department for Education (DfE) when difficulties arose.
Her review – which highlights the case of a religious studies teacher at Batley grammar school in West Yorkshire who was forced into hiding after accusations of blasphemy – recommends a cohesion and conflict unit be set up to support teachers who find themselves being threatened. The unit would also provide training resources to support schools on controversial topics.
The war in Gaza has caused a number of incidents in schools. In one case, Barclay primary school in Leyton, east London, sought help from the Metropolitan police to investigate threats to the school and abuse of staff after its decision to ban political symbols, including the Palestinian flag.
Although many teachers are reluctant to speak out, one secondary school teacher, who did not want to be named, told the Guardian their school was one of the few that had agreed to hold assemblies on the issue and offer a weekly safe space for discussion about the conflict.
“We’re lucky. Generally, management are terrified and teachers are terrified to discuss it. The biggest problem is the kind of silence around it in the vast majority of schools,” they said.
Another teacher in an inner-city school, who also wished to remain anonymous, said it was a “massive failing” on the part of schools. “From the word go, we were told this was a political issue and we can’t discuss it. If we’re not talking about it, it does not mean that the kids are not interested. They know what’s going on. They are going online where there’s no control over what they are seeing.”..
In my anecdotal experience this is nonsense. My school is very diverse and has people of all faiths and plenty who have no faith. In my Y11 class I have kid who has found the past few months very tricky as he has family in Israel. Right next to him is a devout Muslim fasting for Ramadan.
We talk about this stuff. Not as much as we should - but that’s just because time for anything other than the sausage factory of exam prep gets badly squeezed. The only bit of self censorship we did is replace a Channel 4 Youtube video on Hamas with a BBC one because we felt the Channel 4 was too uncritical of Hamas.
Most teachers don’t really know enough to have an opinion on the conflict but it’s pretty easy to empathise with students who do and to help students navigate the complexities of this. No one has ever suggested it shouldn’t be a topic for discussion in school.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
I mean, whoah dude, the Ad Hominem is mad, and makes you look madder, it's not good
And you're an expert on Ad Hominem and madness...
But seriously: are you saying that we should, from your desperate appeals to "Look at MEEEEE!!!!" on here, believe that you are content?
I'm happy saying I'm a stay-at-home dad with a slight exercise addiction, and I'm content. I don't think you'd be content if you had a billion pounds in the bank.
I think you're a fucking loony, TBH
Fair enough. In which case, most of us on PB are probably loonies.
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
I didn't think we'd find something to agree on, @JosiasJessop, but it seems we have. Darker. Yes.
You've followed Leon's obsession with torture, murder, Aztec knives, murder, hanging around with soldiers getting off on how many human beings they've killed, murder, torture, murder made as painful as possible both for the victims and for those who love them, murder that imprints as hard as possible on the world, torture, and knives?
Boasting about his taste in sandwiches or his superior way of cleaning his arse is annoying and perhaps clinically interesting but it's not as dark.
A novel by Sean Thomas called "The Genesis Secret" lays the "theory" bare. I wonder if the author sent a copy to Ian Brady. Or maybe Colin Wilson did. See the theory of the "king rat".
Enjoy your evening, JJ!
You do realise that I LOVE attention, right?
You do? This changes EVERYTHING. I now understand why you post the drivel you post.
Although I did here sonething positive about what3words today. Someone on the radio recommending it to travellers as apparently 1 in 5 who breakdown do not know where they are. Maybe it has a future after all?
If they do not know where they are how do they know what.three.words to use?
The app on their phone tells them. I mean no one knows the three word location without looking at the app.
True story: I once broke down in Carmarthen. I called the AA, and they sent a van to....Caernarfon
Got a puncture near ASDA Dunbar on the A1 - RAC call centre tried to dispatch a mechanic to Dundee. At least it is the same coast, I suppose.
Hit a rogue ratchet from a ratchet strap on the M5 near Frankley Services (Birmingham) and shredded the osf tyre. Green Flag scrambled a contractor from Bristol who assumed the post code was BS rather than B. Returned home when he realised the error, whilst I remained on the hard shoulder near Frankley Services.
Schools in England accused of closing down debate on Israel-Gaza conflict Government adviser says teachers feel ill-equipped to talk about controversial topics but avoiding debate risks fuelling anger
Dame Sara Khan said that if schools continued to shut down debate they risked “fuelling further anger, hate and polarisation”.
She said the conflict, which has prompted huge demonstrations by hundreds of thousands of pro-Palestinian protesters across London and elsewhere, has had a marked impact on schools, where pupils want to talk about events in Gaza.
Days after the publication of her review into threats to social cohesion, Khan repeated her assertion that teachers were avoiding addressing controversial issues because of fears of being targeted by campaigns of intimidation and harassment.
She also said teachers felt there was too little guidance on teaching controversial issues in personal, social, health and economic (PSHE) lessons and were worried about a lack of support from the Department for Education (DfE) when difficulties arose.
Her review – which highlights the case of a religious studies teacher at Batley grammar school in West Yorkshire who was forced into hiding after accusations of blasphemy – recommends a cohesion and conflict unit be set up to support teachers who find themselves being threatened. The unit would also provide training resources to support schools on controversial topics.
The war in Gaza has caused a number of incidents in schools. In one case, Barclay primary school in Leyton, east London, sought help from the Metropolitan police to investigate threats to the school and abuse of staff after its decision to ban political symbols, including the Palestinian flag.
Although many teachers are reluctant to speak out, one secondary school teacher, who did not want to be named, told the Guardian their school was one of the few that had agreed to hold assemblies on the issue and offer a weekly safe space for discussion about the conflict.
“We’re lucky. Generally, management are terrified and teachers are terrified to discuss it. The biggest problem is the kind of silence around it in the vast majority of schools,” they said.
Another teacher in an inner-city school, who also wished to remain anonymous, said it was a “massive failing” on the part of schools. “From the word go, we were told this was a political issue and we can’t discuss it. If we’re not talking about it, it does not mean that the kids are not interested. They know what’s going on. They are going online where there’s no control over what they are seeing.”..
In my anecdotal experience this is nonsense. My school is very diverse and has people of all faiths and plenty who have no faith. In my Y11 class I have kid who has found the past few months very tricky as he has family in Israel. Right next to him is a devout Muslim fasting for Ramadan.
We talk about this stuff. Not as much as we should - but that’s just because time for anything other than the sausage factory of exam prep gets badly squeezed. The only bit of self censorship we did is replace a Channel 4 Youtube video on Hamas with a BBC one because we felt the Channel 4 was too uncritical of Hamas.
Most teachers don’t really know enough to have an opinion on the conflict but it’s pretty easy to empathise with students who do and to help students navigate the complexities of this. No one has ever suggested it shouldn’t be a topic for discussion in school.
It is very easy to retreat in to a kind of mindless cowardice.
One thing I noticed was that my youngest daughter’s school was especially good at dealing with tricky topics. The head was one of those people who would have walked through fire for her staff and pupils. Not in a showy way. But in that very British let’s-not-be-silly kind of way. Leadership, I think they call it.
Schools in England accused of closing down debate on Israel-Gaza conflict Government adviser says teachers feel ill-equipped to talk about controversial topics but avoiding debate risks fuelling anger
Dame Sara Khan said that if schools continued to shut down debate they risked “fuelling further anger, hate and polarisation”.
She said the conflict, which has prompted huge demonstrations by hundreds of thousands of pro-Palestinian protesters across London and elsewhere, has had a marked impact on schools, where pupils want to talk about events in Gaza.
Days after the publication of her review into threats to social cohesion, Khan repeated her assertion that teachers were avoiding addressing controversial issues because of fears of being targeted by campaigns of intimidation and harassment.
She also said teachers felt there was too little guidance on teaching controversial issues in personal, social, health and economic (PSHE) lessons and were worried about a lack of support from the Department for Education (DfE) when difficulties arose.
Her review – which highlights the case of a religious studies teacher at Batley grammar school in West Yorkshire who was forced into hiding after accusations of blasphemy – recommends a cohesion and conflict unit be set up to support teachers who find themselves being threatened. The unit would also provide training resources to support schools on controversial topics.
The war in Gaza has caused a number of incidents in schools. In one case, Barclay primary school in Leyton, east London, sought help from the Metropolitan police to investigate threats to the school and abuse of staff after its decision to ban political symbols, including the Palestinian flag.
Although many teachers are reluctant to speak out, one secondary school teacher, who did not want to be named, told the Guardian their school was one of the few that had agreed to hold assemblies on the issue and offer a weekly safe space for discussion about the conflict.
“We’re lucky. Generally, management are terrified and teachers are terrified to discuss it. The biggest problem is the kind of silence around it in the vast majority of schools,” they said.
Another teacher in an inner-city school, who also wished to remain anonymous, said it was a “massive failing” on the part of schools. “From the word go, we were told this was a political issue and we can’t discuss it. If we’re not talking about it, it does not mean that the kids are not interested. They know what’s going on. They are going online where there’s no control over what they are seeing.”..
In my anecdotal experience this is nonsense. My school is very diverse and has people of all faiths and plenty who have no faith. In my Y11 class I have kid who has found the past few months very tricky as he has family in Israel. Right next to him is a devout Muslim fasting for Ramadan.
We talk about this stuff. Not as much as we should - but that’s just because time for anything other than the sausage factory of exam prep gets badly squeezed. The only bit of self censorship we did is replace a Channel 4 Youtube video on Hamas with a BBC one because we felt the Channel 4 was too uncritical of Hamas.
Most teachers don’t really know enough to have an opinion on the conflict but it’s pretty easy to empathise with students who do and to help students navigate the complexities of this. No one has ever suggested it shouldn’t be a topic for discussion in school.
It is very easy to retreat in to a kind of mindless cowardice.
One thing I noticed was that my youngest daughter’s school was especially good at dealing with tricky topics. The head was one of those people who would have walked through fire for her staff and pupils. Not in a showy way. But in that very British let’s-not-be-silly kind of way. Leadership, I think they call it.
Exactly this. Also, it’s very easy to be an arsehole about things that others feel strongly about eg Gaza.
I’d argue good leadership is often about being neither a coward nor an arsehole.
He really is a kind of cartoon character, made real
TL;DW: He says compute going into AI is increasing by ten times every six months. That's 100X a year. Wildly exponential, and he expects this to continue
In that light he makes these predictions, a form of AGI - a computer smarter than any individual by next year, 2025, and a computer smarter than all of humanity combined, ASI, by 2029-30
Five years away
Now, I may be misconstruing him in some way, but that sounds like The Singularity. That is the world transformed - within 5 years. This is hurtling towards us at extraordinary speed. He actually says that - "I've never seen anything grow this fast"
I know PB has quite a few Musko-skeptics, so maybe he is wrong on this (as he has been wrong on self driving cars, consistently). Alternatively, he is right, and whooooooh
Musk's current view seems to be: *) Mass immigration is really bad. Immigrants should have parents who own emerald mines. *) The US's population needs to roughly triple, to a billion. *) He is concerned with population collapse.
The only way to currently reconcile these views are to totally restrict women's reproduction rights, which oddly enough is something the (ahem) odder Republicans are in favour of.
Musk denied his parents owned an emerald mine. He offered a reward for anyone who could prove it. His dad asked if he could take part as he had the proof!
You could give 99.9999999% of people in the world an emerald mine age 18, and they wouldn’t end up the richest person in the world, owning their own space fleet and deciding wars and making best selling revolutionary cars and possessing entire social mediums
Musk is exceptional. I get that many loathe him, but he is clearly exceptional
He's achieved a lot. Probably not as much as he acts like - making wild predictions is not an achievement even if some pan out - but a lot.
He also deliberately presents himself as an arsehole know it all - eg telling people to f*ck off when they hurt his feelings, claiming to be a legal expert because he's been involved in a lot of lawsuits - so he cannot really complain about negative reactions to him personally when that's part of his public persona.
Saying Elon Musk has achieved "a lot" is like saying William Shakespeare wrote "pretty good plays"
I sincerely wonder if there is a human being in history with a CV of world changing engineering and superb tech creation like Musk. It is flabbergasting when you step back. I think many shrug it off because either they can't be objective (he likes Trump!) or they simply don't grasp the scale
Also, he is a thin skinned and hypersensitive twat, with Asperger's, which makes him socially awkward. That is also true, and also irrelevant to what he has done
Like Edison, Musk sucks off the work of others. He only survived ?2008? because of a timely injection of future cash from the federal government (for both Tesla and SpaceX).
And don't use the 'Aspergers' excuse for him. Lots of people have Aspergers and don't do the sh*t he does because they manage it. He's a nasty tech-bro.
He’s also not spending Friday night on PB.com and is working out how he can spend billions on something fun. I think he’s sort of winning here.
He seems to spend quite a few Friday nights on X. Which he spent billions on. I'm not entirely convinced that's the better end of the bargain.
Hmm. I dunno. I'm going out on a limb here but I feel Elon Musk has achieved a bit more than PB's very own @JosiasJessop
Is that too radical a statement? Well, that's me, and you need to accept it. Audacious and bold
Well, I've never lied about things like my own son dying in my arms. And I've personally cared for my child throughout his life, which is more than you can say for your daughters.
SO yeah, from my own perspective, I've 'achieved' more than you and he have.
Most of all, I'm relatively content. Which is again, more than can be said about you and he.
Dont you wanna walk on the wild side like Leon.
I've walked as much on the 'wild side' as I want to, thanks. I'm 51 now, and am happy playing with my son, reading books, and trying to achieve my own little modest goals in life.
What's not to like about that?
There's some variant of the Micawber principle here I reckon, balancing life goals with ability to attain said ambitions. The art of good living being to know when to push on and when to stop.
And yes, important parts of human progress have come from unreasonable individuals like Musk not knowing when to stop. (Though possibly fewer than Great Man Theory would have us think.) But other unreasonable individuals given power have used it to create human misery.
In any case, Musk's undoubted technical triumphs don't mean that he has any particular reason to be heard on other themes. And a sucessful liar with poor manners is still a liar with poor manners.
"‘The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.’" - George Bernard Shaw.
I'm generally a positive person, which helps. I've never particularly encountered the Black Dog. But I think what helps more is that, when I was a teenager, I faced health issues, and was told I would never walk properly again. I lucked out, fluked into finding a brilliant surgeon, and after a decade and many operations got fixed. I can walk down the street without pain and think: "Life is good!"
My teens and early twenties were not particularly good for me; which means that, in some ways, I count my blessings every day. I have a beautiful and intelligent wife; a wonderful son, no mortgage, money in the bank and investments, and my health. Any of those could change negatively any day, so why not count my blessing now? There are millions of people who don't have any of the above.
I've had some sh*t happen in my life, but I've ended up in a good position, and happy. Some of that was luck, admittedly.
Good for you. Seriously. Just drop the unprompted ad hom attacks, it's not a great move
I hate to remind you, but you called me a 'cuck', or cuckold, a while back. Something that insulted not jsut me, but my wife. And something she found laughable but insulting. You also routinely insult other posters.
So before you go on about ad homs, I might suggest you take your own advice.
Ohhkayy, someone needs to end this discourse on a gentlemanly note
I am sorry you had a bad time as a kid, and a young adult. You strike me as a thoughtful and sensitive person. I imagine - believe it or not - we would probably get on over a pint. I am much nicer than my prickly online persona, I come here for arguments, I don't do that in real life. I think that is probably true of most of us, here on PB, we come on here to debate and argue, freeing our precious family and friends from our insistent opinions
God bless you, your wife, and your child. God speed you all. Pax
I think 99% of us are different from our online personae; if only because most people are nice; nuances are harder to express online, and it's much harder to insult someone face-to-face.
Like most people I use an online persona to be bolder and more provocative than in real life.
Then I celebrate my daring with a slice of plain bread and a glass of water.
Schools in England accused of closing down debate on Israel-Gaza conflict Government adviser says teachers feel ill-equipped to talk about controversial topics but avoiding debate risks fuelling anger
Dame Sara Khan said that if schools continued to shut down debate they risked “fuelling further anger, hate and polarisation”.
She said the conflict, which has prompted huge demonstrations by hundreds of thousands of pro-Palestinian protesters across London and elsewhere, has had a marked impact on schools, where pupils want to talk about events in Gaza.
Days after the publication of her review into threats to social cohesion, Khan repeated her assertion that teachers were avoiding addressing controversial issues because of fears of being targeted by campaigns of intimidation and harassment.
She also said teachers felt there was too little guidance on teaching controversial issues in personal, social, health and economic (PSHE) lessons and were worried about a lack of support from the Department for Education (DfE) when difficulties arose.
Her review – which highlights the case of a religious studies teacher at Batley grammar school in West Yorkshire who was forced into hiding after accusations of blasphemy – recommends a cohesion and conflict unit be set up to support teachers who find themselves being threatened. The unit would also provide training resources to support schools on controversial topics.
The war in Gaza has caused a number of incidents in schools. In one case, Barclay primary school in Leyton, east London, sought help from the Metropolitan police to investigate threats to the school and abuse of staff after its decision to ban political symbols, including the Palestinian flag.
Although many teachers are reluctant to speak out, one secondary school teacher, who did not want to be named, told the Guardian their school was one of the few that had agreed to hold assemblies on the issue and offer a weekly safe space for discussion about the conflict.
“We’re lucky. Generally, management are terrified and teachers are terrified to discuss it. The biggest problem is the kind of silence around it in the vast majority of schools,” they said.
Another teacher in an inner-city school, who also wished to remain anonymous, said it was a “massive failing” on the part of schools. “From the word go, we were told this was a political issue and we can’t discuss it. If we’re not talking about it, it does not mean that the kids are not interested. They know what’s going on. They are going online where there’s no control over what they are seeing.”..
In my anecdotal experience this is nonsense. My school is very diverse and has people of all faiths and plenty who have no faith. In my Y11 class I have kid who has found the past few months very tricky as he has family in Israel. Right next to him is a devout Muslim fasting for Ramadan.
We talk about this stuff. Not as much as we should - but that’s just because time for anything other than the sausage factory of exam prep gets badly squeezed. The only bit of self censorship we did is replace a Channel 4 Youtube video on Hamas with a BBC one because we felt the Channel 4 was too uncritical of Hamas.
Most teachers don’t really know enough to have an opinion on the conflict but it’s pretty easy to empathise with students who do and to help students navigate the complexities of this. No one has ever suggested it shouldn’t be a topic for discussion in school.
It is very easy to retreat in to a kind of mindless cowardice.
One thing I noticed was that my youngest daughter’s school was especially good at dealing with tricky topics. The head was one of those people who would have walked through fire for her staff and pupils. Not in a showy way. But in that very British let’s-not-be-silly kind of way. Leadership, I think they call it.
Exactly this. Also, it’s very easy to be an arsehole about things that others feel strongly about eg Gaza.
I’d argue good leadership is often about being neither a coward nor an arsehole.
Sure, but there's also no way that AI compute demand can grow at 100x a year, because it's already about 6-8% of data center capacity. That means it would require data center capacity to increase 6x in a year, which is physically impossible, simply from a infrastructure perspective.
YES! It is going to grow incredibly quickly (AI compute power demand). But those chips need to be made somewhere. Those computers need power and air conditioning and network cards etc. So, that 100x is going to slow to 2x pretty damn quickly, not because the demand isn't there, but because in the real world there are hard physical limits (like semiconductor fabrication capacity) that are hard to work around.
I'm glad you said this it reminds me of Nvidia's "Moore's Law squared" nonsense when comparing GPUs to CPUs than Jensen Huang used to spout. Nvidia never outpaced the underlying technology. Never. Huang doesn't say such rubbish anymore.
What Nvidia did do with each succeeding product generation is to build ever larger chips, on newer processes catching up with the leading edge rather than using a node several generations old, and with ever higher power budgets and price tags. So it certainly appeared that they were doing something, and evolving faster than CPUs but they weren't beating Moore's Law, which was only ever an observation of trends in semiconductor complexity to cost. And once Nvidia caught up with the CPUs their rate of progress fell back in line with the rest of the semiconductor industry.
Basically if you start from nothing or are far behind the competition it can look like you are taking off like a rocket, but you will soon hit the limits or run out of money. TANSTAAFL as people like to say.
I read a Chinese paper about the Sunway OceanLight supercomputer and it detailed benchmarks on a model bigger than anything else announced anywhere else at the time, but there was a clear implication in the paper that model growth was going to hit a wall RSN. No magic is coming along to sustain the growth in model size, not even nuclear fusion and $7 trillion on fabs and data centres will do it.
Schools in England accused of closing down debate on Israel-Gaza conflict Government adviser says teachers feel ill-equipped to talk about controversial topics but avoiding debate risks fuelling anger
Dame Sara Khan said that if schools continued to shut down debate they risked “fuelling further anger, hate and polarisation”.
She said the conflict, which has prompted huge demonstrations by hundreds of thousands of pro-Palestinian protesters across London and elsewhere, has had a marked impact on schools, where pupils want to talk about events in Gaza.
Days after the publication of her review into threats to social cohesion, Khan repeated her assertion that teachers were avoiding addressing controversial issues because of fears of being targeted by campaigns of intimidation and harassment.
She also said teachers felt there was too little guidance on teaching controversial issues in personal, social, health and economic (PSHE) lessons and were worried about a lack of support from the Department for Education (DfE) when difficulties arose.
Her review – which highlights the case of a religious studies teacher at Batley grammar school in West Yorkshire who was forced into hiding after accusations of blasphemy – recommends a cohesion and conflict unit be set up to support teachers who find themselves being threatened. The unit would also provide training resources to support schools on controversial topics.
The war in Gaza has caused a number of incidents in schools. In one case, Barclay primary school in Leyton, east London, sought help from the Metropolitan police to investigate threats to the school and abuse of staff after its decision to ban political symbols, including the Palestinian flag.
Although many teachers are reluctant to speak out, one secondary school teacher, who did not want to be named, told the Guardian their school was one of the few that had agreed to hold assemblies on the issue and offer a weekly safe space for discussion about the conflict.
“We’re lucky. Generally, management are terrified and teachers are terrified to discuss it. The biggest problem is the kind of silence around it in the vast majority of schools,” they said.
Another teacher in an inner-city school, who also wished to remain anonymous, said it was a “massive failing” on the part of schools. “From the word go, we were told this was a political issue and we can’t discuss it. If we’re not talking about it, it does not mean that the kids are not interested. They know what’s going on. They are going online where there’s no control over what they are seeing.”..
In my anecdotal experience this is nonsense. My school is very diverse and has people of all faiths and plenty who have no faith. In my Y11 class I have kid who has found the past few months very tricky as he has family in Israel. Right next to him is a devout Muslim fasting for Ramadan.
We talk about this stuff. Not as much as we should - but that’s just because time for anything other than the sausage factory of exam prep gets badly squeezed. The only bit of self censorship we did is replace a Channel 4 Youtube video on Hamas with a BBC one because we felt the Channel 4 was too uncritical of Hamas.
Most teachers don’t really know enough to have an opinion on the conflict but it’s pretty easy to empathise with students who do and to help students navigate the complexities of this. No one has ever suggested it shouldn’t be a topic for discussion in school.
Similarly with the school I still have something to do with. But that won't be all schools, and I don't think the fears are entirely confected.
Sure, but there's also no way that AI compute demand can grow at 100x a year, because it's already about 6-8% of data center capacity. That means it would require data center capacity to increase 6x in a year, which is physically impossible, simply from a infrastructure perspective.
YES! It is going to grow incredibly quickly (AI compute power demand). But those chips need to be made somewhere. Those computers need power and air conditioning and network cards etc. So, that 100x is going to slow to 2x pretty damn quickly, not because the demand isn't there, but because in the real world there are hard physical limits (like semiconductor fabrication capacity) that are hard to work around.
I'm glad you said this it reminds me of Nvidia's "Moore's Law squared" nonsense when comparing GPUs to CPUs than Jensen Huang used to spout. Nvidia never outpaced the underlying technology. Never. Huang doesn't say such rubbish anymore.
What Nvidia did do with each succeeding product generation is to build ever larger chips, on newer processes catching up with the leading edge rather than using a node several generations old, and with ever higher power budgets and price tags. So it certainly appeared that they were doing something, and evolving faster than CPUs but they weren't beating Moore's Law, which was only ever an observation of trends in semiconductor complexity to cost. And once Nvidia caught up with the CPUs their rate of progress fell back in line with the rest of the semiconductor industry.
Basically if you start from nothing or are far behind the competition it can look like you are taking off like a rocket, but you will soon hit the limits or run out of money. TANSTAAFL as people like to say.
I read a Chinese paper about the Sunway OceanLight supercomputer and it detailed benchmarks on a model bigger than anything else announced anywhere else at the time, but there was a clear implication in the paper that model growth was going to hit a wall RSN. No magic is coming along to sustain the growth in model size, not even nuclear fusion and $7 trillion on fabs and data centres will do it.
But it will be enough to take us beyond AGI probably. And then if they become self improving….
Sure, but there's also no way that AI compute demand can grow at 100x a year, because it's already about 6-8% of data center capacity. That means it would require data center capacity to increase 6x in a year, which is physically impossible, simply from a infrastructure perspective.
YES! It is going to grow incredibly quickly (AI compute power demand). But those chips need to be made somewhere. Those computers need power and air conditioning and network cards etc. So, that 100x is going to slow to 2x pretty damn quickly, not because the demand isn't there, but because in the real world there are hard physical limits (like semiconductor fabrication capacity) that are hard to work around.
I'm glad you said this it reminds me of Nvidia's "Moore's Law squared" nonsense when comparing GPUs to CPUs than Jensen Huang used to spout. Nvidia never outpaced the underlying technology. Never. Huang doesn't say such rubbish anymore.
What Nvidia did do with each succeeding product generation is to build ever larger chips, on newer processes catching up with the leading edge rather than using a node several generations old, and with ever higher power budgets and price tags. So it certainly appeared that they were doing something, and evolving faster than CPUs but they weren't beating Moore's Law, which was only ever an observation of trends in semiconductor complexity to cost. And once Nvidia caught up with the CPUs their rate of progress fell back in line with the rest of the semiconductor industry.
Basically if you start from nothing or are far behind the competition it can look like you are taking off like a rocket, but you will soon hit the limits or run out of money. TANSTAAFL as people like to say.
I read a Chinese paper about the Sunway OceanLight supercomputer and it detailed benchmarks on a model bigger than anything else announced anywhere else at the time, but there was a clear implication in the paper that model growth was going to hit a wall RSN. No magic is coming along to sustain the growth in model size, not even nuclear fusion and $7 trillion on fabs and data centres will do it.
But it will be enough to take us beyond AGI probably. And then if they become self improving….
Sure, but there's also no way that AI compute demand can grow at 100x a year, because it's already about 6-8% of data center capacity. That means it would require data center capacity to increase 6x in a year, which is physically impossible, simply from a infrastructure perspective.
YES! It is going to grow incredibly quickly (AI compute power demand). But those chips need to be made somewhere. Those computers need power and air conditioning and network cards etc. So, that 100x is going to slow to 2x pretty damn quickly, not because the demand isn't there, but because in the real world there are hard physical limits (like semiconductor fabrication capacity) that are hard to work around.
I'm glad you said this it reminds me of Nvidia's "Moore's Law squared" nonsense when comparing GPUs to CPUs than Jensen Huang used to spout. Nvidia never outpaced the underlying technology. Never. Huang doesn't say such rubbish anymore.
What Nvidia did do with each succeeding product generation is to build ever larger chips, on newer processes catching up with the leading edge rather than using a node several generations old, and with ever higher power budgets and price tags. So it certainly appeared that they were doing something, and evolving faster than CPUs but they weren't beating Moore's Law, which was only ever an observation of trends in semiconductor complexity to cost. And once Nvidia caught up with the CPUs their rate of progress fell back in line with the rest of the semiconductor industry.
Basically if you start from nothing or are far behind the competition it can look like you are taking off like a rocket, but you will soon hit the limits or run out of money. TANSTAAFL as people like to say.
I read a Chinese paper about the Sunway OceanLight supercomputer and it detailed benchmarks on a model bigger than anything else announced anywhere else at the time, but there was a clear implication in the paper that model growth was going to hit a wall RSN. No magic is coming along to sustain the growth in model size, not even nuclear fusion and $7 trillion on fabs and data centres will do it.
But it will be enough to take us beyond AGI probably. And then if they become self improving….
No magic can increase the hardware volume on the kind of scale that is being talked about - it would take decades of actually building stuff. And even that runs out road.
Comments
But you are something much worse than a loony. And darker.
"See that bloke over there? He hit his wife repeatedly?"
"Yeah, so what? See that bloke at that table? He RUNS MARATHONS... Worse than Hitler, runners are..."
I might suggest that this is a problem with your reality rather than mine.
This is, incidentally, one of the areas that the UK has a long term problems with doing.
But you are increasingly sounding like SeanT's alter-ego.
The thing that worries me when watching those scenes in the TV version is how much it reminded me of the MAGA Trump cult. Reality is irrelevant: you just have to follow the party.
The AI is all over this, and masters it in seconds. If you're not perturbed by this you're not thinking hard enough. If AI can master the editing of quite literary mystery novels in 45 seconds, it can do anything. Literally any cognitive task is within its grasp. And this is right now. Right here
And it will do it better than any of us, and do it for pennies, instantaneously
PB mainly attracts people who work in the cognitive industries. So I need to say this. Guys, we are all fucked. It's over
In about a year only post-person @BlancheLivermore will have a job
1) Get fucked over by foreigners
2) Chaos
3) Civil wars
4) Quieter bits where things were slightly better.
Which is a powerful sell for "Uniform Plastic Han Kulture + obedience to the One Party."
Tell me how all the lorry drivers made redundant by autonomous vehicles are doing. Oh no, they weren't.
You've followed Leon's obsession with torture, murder, Aztec knives, murder, hanging around with soldiers getting off on how many human beings they've killed, murder, torture, murder made as painful as possible both for the victims and for those who love them, murder that imprints as hard as possible on the world, torture, and knives?
Boasting about his taste in sandwiches or his superior way of cleaning his arse is annoying and perhaps clinically interesting but it's not as dark.
A novel by Sean Thomas called "The Genesis Secret" lays the "theory" bare. I wonder if the author sent a copy to Ian Brady. Or maybe Colin Wilson did. See the theory of the "king rat".
Enjoy your evening, JJ!
And all the guides assume that you actually want to enjoy these walks. Talk to people, drink wine, decent night sleep. Pathetic really. 800km in 20 days. That's more like it.
Without spoilers - the scene when the children are showing the Gestapo men the anti-semitic cartoon book. Just after the... shoes scene.
I prefer ai in lower case
It looks less threatening, and it doesn't look like AL which is sometimes confusing
But young people will definitely lose their jobs within the next 12 months, and within 5-10 years everyone in cognitive work will lose their jobs. Why would they not? Capitalism demands profit, AI means you can do everything cheaper
There may be a Luddite revolution when we smash all the robots (and that really might happen) but absent that, we are fucked. Dull witted and conformist lab scientists are not long for this world, sorry
And yes, important parts of human progress have come from unreasonable individuals like Musk not knowing when to stop. (Though possibly fewer than Great Man Theory would have us think.) But other unreasonable individuals given power have used it to create human misery.
In any case, Musk's undoubted technical triumphs don't mean that he has any particular reason to be heard on other themes. And a sucessful liar with poor manners is still a liar with poor manners.
{high fives all round in the Daily Mail newsroom}
And I'll sleep better than the twenty seven km per day pussies
So here's my question: can I use AI to speed this up?
If I fed about four or five reviews of a concept, the concept itself, the Wikipedia article and some other gubbins and said "AI, please write me a 800-1200 word article detailing the concept of Thing based on this input", can I do that? Do I have to instal an AI or can I just open an account with BigAICorp (soon to be BigAICorpX) to do it? What's the copyright sitiuation?
There's stuff I really want to do. Lenin's State and Revolution. Kaczynski's Industrial Society and Its Future. The entire National Conservatism 2023 conference. If I can shortcut the read-understand-digest-type process and reduce the turnaround time from months to hours/days, it will really speed things up.
Should we go to Musk for political opinions? Of course not, possibly the opposite, everything he says and does indicates he is quite peculiar and his socio-political views are no better informed (possibly worse) than the average PB-er
But for an opinion on technological progress, especially AI? Er, yeah, he is THE MAN. Tesla is basically trying to create an AI car and he is a founder member of OpenAI, and he has a track record - beyond imagining - of creating new tech companies that shake the world. He is the dude, on this subject, and he knows everyone, and he has all the data in his his weird hair-restored head, and he thinks we will achieve AGI in 2025 and ASI by 2029
Ignoring this is not just foolish, it is an error
But in this @Leon is absolutely right: there will be massive turnover of people due to AI. The amount of work for friendly local solicitors is going to absolutely collapse, because so much of their work will be able to be automated. Now, that doesn't mean there will be no work - but as it will dramatically ease the writing (and analyzing) of contracts, the work of conveyencing, etc., it will mean that there will be fewer solicitors needed.
Now, will it affect demand for plumbers or cooks or waiters or hairdressers? No. But it is coming for a whole host of white collar workers jobs.
It will also dramatically increase the speed of technological innovation. Smaller programming teams can do more.
I was talking with my wife about why there's no universal database of artists work by museum. And I realized, given a month or so (which I don't have), and the various AI tools out there, I could pull something together. Search Van Gogh's by city. Where do I need to go to see the most pieces by Frida Kahlo etc.
It's like the steam engine, but for the mind. It's an incredible force multiplier, and those who know how to use it will be massive beneficiaries. But there are going to be whole industries that get crucified.
I'm generally a positive person, which helps. I've never particularly encountered the Black Dog. But I think what helps more is that, when I was a teenager, I faced health issues, and was told I would never walk properly again. I lucked out, fluked into finding a brilliant surgeon, and after a decade and many operations got fixed. I can walk down the street without pain and think: "Life is good!"
My teens and early twenties were not particularly good for me; which means that, in some ways, I count my blessings every day. I have a beautiful and intelligent wife; a wonderful son, no mortgage, money in the bank and investments, and my health. Any of those could change negatively any day, so why not count my blessing now? There are millions of people who don't have any of the above.
I've had some sh*t happen in my life, but I've ended up in a good position, and happy. Some of that was luck, admittedly.
Although I did here sonething positive about what3words today. Someone on the radio recommending it to travellers as apparently 1 in 5 who breakdown do not know where they are. Maybe it has a future after all?
My guess is poorly, as it seems experts rely on more than just a picture of the painting to determine authenticity - and the AI may find it hard to explain its reasoning.
YES! It is going to grow incredibly quickly (AI compute power demand). But those chips need to be made somewhere. Those computers need power and air conditioning and network cards etc. So, that 100x is going to slow to 2x pretty damn quickly, not because the demand isn't there, but because in the real world there are hard physical limits (like semiconductor fabrication capacity) that are hard to work around.
I'm not sure AI adds much here.
It's travel hacks that can be replaced easily by AI.
https://claude.ai/chats
So do I now work less hours? Nope. I do different things, and have been promoted on the basis of that.
Work changes. People adapt. If they don’t then there will be casualties.
So much of this discourse is betweeen effete liberal left dullards, like you and @turbotubbs, who actually have no clue what they are talking about, and imagine it is all some fantasy land, bizarrely tinged with Trumpite beliefs because of Musk
It isn't. Your stupid job is done for. Good
Could ML learn an artists particular artistic fingerprints from 'known' paintings, and use those to search through other paintings, as Bendor does? It'd certainly be an interesting test.
"Microsoft, OpenAI plan $100 billion data-center project, media report says"
Just a casual $100bn
Whoever gets to AGI first will reap trilliions, it will get done
https://www.reuters.com/technology/microsoft-openai-planning-100-billion-data-center-project-information-reports-2024-03-29/
Which is why we can afford nice things.
I’ve tried Chatgpt. It was shit. I expect Claude is vastly better, but my job/role is more than just churning out text.
We will use these tools. That’s what we do with tools.
I get why your worried. Even Chatgpt is good enough at fluff pieces for travel journalists.
So before you go on about ad homs, I might suggest you take your own advice.
This is likely why I have an entire year full of travel gigs
The AI justice machine knows where you are living, knows where you are working, it knows you are only allowed to leave the house to go to work and by a set route. You don’t get to go on jollies. You stray and an AI calls you and reminds you that you have a few minutes to get back on track before it alerts the police.
Offenders get to live at home, not breaking up families. They get to go to work so remain a useful member of society. They are kept out of jail to spiral into crime and meeting other crims.
They are punished because they can’t have a normal life so it’s a hard lesson.
The state wins by not having to house prisoners and employ thousands to watch and control them and benefits from people continuing work and family life.
I think your year of travel gigs simply shows that AI isn't going to be replacing people any time soon.
I am sorry you had a bad time as a kid, and a young adult. You strike me as a thoughtful and sensitive person. I imagine - believe it or not - we would probably get on over a pint. I am much nicer than my prickly online persona, I come here for arguments, I don't do that in real life. I think that is probably true of most of us, here on PB, we come on here to debate and argue, freeing our precious family and friends from our insistent opinions
God bless you, your wife, and your child. God speed you all. Pax
(Personal anecodote: a large chunk of my degree was crystallography- Crick and Watson and all that. Turned out that while I was doing that, the bits that were difficult, the maths and the visualisation, become pretty easy once you have enough computing power to throw at them. There are still humans working in the field, but they add value in other ways.)
So yes, pax. Have a great evening. It's past my bedtime, and we're going to a little archaeological exhibition tomorrow morning...
But yes, weirdly, travel writers might be the last to go, indeed they might survive entirely, as a robot can never replace the personal human experience
This will be the writing that survives. The human stuff. All else will be overtaken. It is pretty grim, to be honest, if you extrapolate - all the good, fun jobs will be taken. This is not what we were promised
Government adviser says teachers feel ill-equipped to talk about controversial topics but avoiding debate risks fuelling anger
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/29/schools-england-accused-closing-down-debate-israel-gaza-conflict
Schools in England are closing down legitimate debate about the Israel-Gaza conflict because teachers feel ill-equipped and are concerned about political impartiality, the government’s independent adviser on social cohesion has said.
Dame Sara Khan said that if schools continued to shut down debate they risked “fuelling further anger, hate and polarisation”.
She said the conflict, which has prompted huge demonstrations by hundreds of thousands of pro-Palestinian protesters across London and elsewhere, has had a marked impact on schools, where pupils want to talk about events in Gaza.
Days after the publication of her review into threats to social cohesion, Khan repeated her assertion that teachers were avoiding addressing controversial issues because of fears of being targeted by campaigns of intimidation and harassment.
She also said teachers felt there was too little guidance on teaching controversial issues in personal, social, health and economic (PSHE) lessons and were worried about a lack of support from the Department for Education (DfE) when difficulties arose.
Her review – which highlights the case of a religious studies teacher at Batley grammar school in West Yorkshire who was forced into hiding after accusations of blasphemy – recommends a cohesion and conflict unit be set up to support teachers who find themselves being threatened. The unit would also provide training resources to support schools on controversial topics.
The war in Gaza has caused a number of incidents in schools. In one case, Barclay primary school in Leyton, east London, sought help from the Metropolitan police to investigate threats to the school and abuse of staff after its decision to ban political symbols, including the Palestinian flag.
Although many teachers are reluctant to speak out, one secondary school teacher, who did not want to be named, told the Guardian their school was one of the few that had agreed to hold assemblies on the issue and offer a weekly safe space for discussion about the conflict.
“We’re lucky. Generally, management are terrified and teachers are terrified to discuss it. The biggest problem is the kind of silence around it in the vast majority of schools,” they said.
Another teacher in an inner-city school, who also wished to remain anonymous, said it was a “massive failing” on the part of schools. “From the word go, we were told this was a political issue and we can’t discuss it. If we’re not talking about it, it does not mean that the kids are not interested. They know what’s going on. They are going online where there’s no control over what they are seeing.”..
There are only so many cutting edge chip fabrication plants in the world: no point in building the facilities if you don't have the chips. And let's say you want to build more chips. Well, there's a three or four year gap from saying "we need a new fab" to getting the first silicon out. And if everyone wants to do it at once, then there isn't enough lithography equipment for all those new fabs.
It's happening, but quite a lot of that $100bn is going to be swallowed up in cost inflation. (Which is why ASML Lithography is now the third largest company in Europe by market capitalisation.)
And don’t get me started on Woolfardisworty, Happisborough and all the rest.
Librarian or bookseller X knows that this book was once in the library of such and such, because of a neat code, binding, style that said owner used in 1725.
Junior librarian or bookseller takes over, the knowledge is lost.
It isn't written down. It is almost solely learned from experience in handling another one of those books with that code, binding, etc
It presents some tremendous opportunities when juniors in auction houses are given lots to catalogue....
We talk about this stuff. Not as much as we should - but that’s just because time for anything other than the sausage factory of exam prep gets badly squeezed. The only bit of self censorship we did is replace a Channel 4 Youtube video on Hamas with a BBC one because we felt the Channel 4 was too uncritical of Hamas.
Most teachers don’t really know enough to have an opinion on the conflict but it’s pretty easy to empathise with students who do and to help students navigate the complexities of this. No one has ever suggested it shouldn’t be a topic for discussion in school.
Thank you and good night.
Honourable mention to The Thick Of It.
Not going to lie but the episode where Wilson died had me so emotional.
Was distraught when Paul Ritter died.
One thing I noticed was that my youngest daughter’s school was especially good at dealing with tricky topics. The head was one of those people who would have walked through fire for her staff and pupils. Not in a showy way. But in that very British let’s-not-be-silly kind of way. Leadership, I think they call it.
I’d argue good leadership is often about being neither a coward nor an arsehole.
Then I celebrate my daring with a slice of plain bread and a glass of water.
I'm glad you said this it reminds me of Nvidia's "Moore's Law squared" nonsense when comparing GPUs to CPUs than Jensen Huang used to spout. Nvidia never outpaced the underlying technology. Never. Huang doesn't say such rubbish anymore.
What Nvidia did do with each succeeding product generation is to build ever larger chips, on newer processes catching up with the leading edge rather than using a node several generations old, and with ever higher power budgets and price tags. So it certainly appeared that they were doing something, and evolving faster than CPUs but they weren't beating Moore's Law, which was only ever an observation of trends in semiconductor complexity to cost. And once Nvidia caught up with the CPUs their rate of progress fell back in line with the rest of the semiconductor industry.
Basically if you start from nothing or are far behind the competition it can look like you are taking off like a rocket, but you will soon hit the limits or run out of money. TANSTAAFL as people like to say.
I read a Chinese paper about the Sunway OceanLight supercomputer and it detailed benchmarks on a model bigger than anything else announced anywhere else at the time, but there was a clear implication in the paper that model growth was going to hit a wall RSN. No magic is coming along to sustain the growth in model size, not even nuclear fusion and $7 trillion on fabs and data centres will do it.
But that won't be all schools, and I don't think the fears are entirely confected.
Biden 45%
Trump 45%
https://www.economist.com/interactive/us-2024-election/trump-biden-polls/
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1773371971579117903