But look how dangerous these models are. They need to be regulated so that only responsible closed model providers can produce them.
Just ignore that the responsible closed model providers are the ones opening their sandboxes and training their models on blackhat sources.
Oh, facebook will steal the data even if they say they won’t. What’s interesting is they put a price on blatant prompt copying.
Meta had an explicit higher price for using their model without retention of prompts for training. This all but confirms your theory.
Then people are surprised that claude code gets better at coding
More bags, higher delivery fee makes sense. But it doesn’t matter if it’s 2lb of ramen or 2lb of lobster.
It’s the whole suite of Adobe, not just photoshop
It seems that the driver doesn’t need to know the value of the box they are delivering. They should expect the same tip from a $3 box and a $300.
In theory the “reasoning” part doesn’t need a knowledge update.
Cost/benefit maybe the knowledge update only needs something every 5 years.
Basically I can see a world where inference is provided and consumed at cost. I can’t see one where customers are willing to cough up billions for a slight increase in the knowledge base.
Is it? It’s vital to the tech giants marketing and trillion dollar valuation. But I don’t think it’s vital to most of their clients anymore.
A natural zoonotic path does not (yet) exist. It is correct to say none has been found.
the Huanan Market in Wuhan was the early and main epicentre of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection.
There you are.
there is no indication that the Wuhan Institute of Virology had studied viruses similar to SARS‐CoV‐2 or artificially modified coronaviruses before the COVID‐19 pandemic
This part of the paper is out of date. We now know there was a subaward to the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, to understand how bat coronaviruses have the potential to become transmissible to the human population.
All the AI companies are running at loss
That is if you include training. Look at deepseek for an idea of inference costs. At that level AI coding is sustainable (but not worth $2tn).
How do you get from “we don’t think the disease naturally originated in Wuhan” to “China engineered a virus, released it in their own city, and then used that as a vector for malicious infection of the rest of the world”?
I didn’t. You invented all of that.
We know the EcoHealth Alliance had a gain of function research proposal that would have produced a virus remarkably similar to covid was rejected for funding by DARPA.
We know Covid originated in Wuhan.
Accidents happen even in level 4 biolabs. The is no need for you to be sinophobic.
Are we still doing Wuhan Lab Leak Theory? Wasn’t that debunked ages ago
There was an attempt at debunking the lab leak theory early on with a nature article saying we do not believe any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible. Then there was a rejected DARPA research proposal detailing exactly how the laboratory-based scenario is possible.
Lab origin has not been proven but there is no natural zoonotic path to Wuhan. Lab encouraged gain of function with in species reproduction seems most likely.
Half the US intelligence agencies support the lab origin theory.
I just pull and push on the scales.
Believe it or not, it was not “normal” to use slurs in children’s books in 1952.
It heavily depends which books you look in.
Our server adds a pain vector
Really? What’s one of those then?
Is latency at audiojack levels?
Ooh. Sounds useful. Where can I see that?
They thought they sold tokens, they actually sell marginally (6 months lead) improved models.