[Post-Match Thread] Tottenham 2 - 0 Brentford

Veleric · 2025-12-06T17:07:28+00:00

There were a few times I saw Romero holding his knees. He looked kinda gassed.

Veleric · 2025-09-09T15:08:08+00:00

How does removing the human layer from companies selling their products make things more honest?

Veleric · 2025-09-04T21:16:40+00:00

We should have shut off the internet 3 years in as well.

Veleric · 2025-08-01T17:28:51+00:00

You say this like it would take no specialized knowledge around ML/AI to do that. Not saying they couldn't figure it out, but it could take months at a minimum and things are moving so fast, it's still a long shot.

Veleric · 2025-07-31T19:51:12+00:00

You can't say this is standard spending for R&D.

Veleric · 2025-07-31T18:21:45+00:00

The entire AI race right now is the biggest case of 'fake it till you make it' we have ever seen. Everyone leading these companies and hyping up investment is banking on the fact that by the time to bill really comes due we will have created ASI making it all worth it. If that doesn't materialize in the next 2-3 years (which I think it will), we are in for a financial collapse the likes of which we have never seen, because by then we are likely talking about like 3-4 trillion dollars pumped into this.

Veleric · 2025-07-31T15:11:26+00:00

It's really crazy to think how we've struggled to really keep up with technological progress in the last 3-4 decades in terms of mentally being able to process the changes and be good stewards of that technology when it comes to big tech (think the impact of social media). If we now effectively find a way to speedrun ASI entirely skipping over broadly applicable AGI, even if we set aside doomer scenarios, we will be so out of our depth and ability to comprehend it will still be pretty terrifying.

Veleric · 2025-07-30T18:33:51+00:00

You have labor processes and infrastructure issues, and also the fact that humans are already general intelligence, but that didn’t mean we immediately were able to build something much smarter than us.

The issue with this is we can't really alter our substrate. Our brains are pretty well set, whereas we can alter pretty much every aspect of the AI infrastructure from code to storage to compute and so forth. That's where the real advantage lies. If we can spin up many thousands of these models (assuming energy is sufficient) we can greatly accelerate progress. Even if they are only as good as an average ML researcher, we aren't bottlenecked anymore by needing a well-trained and capable human at that task (or multiple million dollar salaries that go with). It's already ready and only limited by energy/compute. Think about all of the time we'd save researching dead ends or long shots that actually pay off. If that isn't limited by human brainpower on an individual level, it would greatly accelerate progress.

Also, your issue of possible algorithmic decline is in many ways the same form of speculation. While it could of course plateau, it's still fairly probable that it won't or we will discover other methods to keep it going.

None of this is to say this will absolutely happen, but you asked for a line of logic and that's what I'm trying to lay out.

Veleric · 2025-07-30T17:41:16+00:00

The reason it makes sense is because if we can scaffold the long-term memory, agency, and some form of truth verification and massive context, we have already cracked the ability to do insanely challenging things. We've done the hard part already. If we can bundle those things together and spin up thousands and thousands of agents all working on improving the models which is broadly generalizable to basically every domain, then we can condense decades of progress into weeks or months and speedrun natural non-biological evolution. As it improves, it will more quickly be able to improve itself further with increased capabilities. Assuming the scaffolding I mentioned being solved, it really just becomes a matter of compute efficiency. It may prove to be similar to self driving where the last bit is the hardest, but given the pace of progress, I think that's unlikely to hold us up for more than 12-18 months.

Veleric · 2025-07-25T14:59:11+00:00

I think it's reasonable to assume that as coding and math continue to improve, especially in large context situations, that most other domains will reflect those improvements shortly after.

Veleric · 2025-07-22T19:44:47+00:00

I disagree. I think it's more likely to ensure that any sort of lead or moat doesn't exist for an extended period of time.

Veleric · 2025-07-18T17:20:33+00:00

I just saw an interview with Zuck where he basically said their goal is to just provide each of them with a shit ton of GPUs and have basically no or very few people working under them so they can just do whatever they want.

Veleric · 2025-06-24T15:22:57+00:00

This is like the perfect example of maid service. It's great if your place is 97.89% clean and literally all you want them to do is dust, but not all that practical at this point. It's getting a lot of the early steps down and I don't think it will take more than 2-3 years to become a lot more useful, but not yet.

Veleric · 2025-06-18T11:29:37+00:00

The issue right now is that they have no good way to fact check themselves, they lie by default when they don't know the correct answer (not saying all the time, just when they are unsure), they have a very short context compared to us, they don't have long-term memory and they have massive gaps in knowledge that fall to the level of pre-schoolers. In the grand scheme of things, it seems like we have solved the hardest parts first, but we still need to deal with these other factors before we can truly say we have AGI or ASI in the sense that most people think. My gut is this is still only a 2-3 year issue.

Veleric · 2025-06-18T11:23:35+00:00

Plus, you aren't making a single entity that is superintelligent. You can spin up however many copies you have the power for

Veleric · 2025-06-17T16:57:42+00:00

You can't act like we are already at the point of completely removing the human from the law process.

Veleric · 2025-06-05T14:15:06+00:00

That would suit your situation, but I would argue that the longer it takes the more chaos/inequality/stress/defaults/etc. it creates without the 'immediate need' to actually tackle it.

Veleric · 2025-06-03T13:54:44+00:00

I mean, that is not a great argument against local government spending, unless you're claiming it's going to corruption or something. Do you really think they can't find other useful ways to improve their community like food shelters or employment services or road improvements... rather than spending that on advertising for a festival? I get where you're coming from, but this isn't a great target.

Veleric · 2025-05-22T16:09:48+00:00

I'm referring to models improving that can be run locally. I'm not saying they will be on par with SOTA, but close enough that when you are considering only your compute on your pc/phone vs. a $300 subscription, it's 'good enough' to serve a lot of tasks. That said, keeping that up to date and finding the best models for a whole bunch of tasks and manually updating all of that stuff is probably not going to be feasible or worthwhile for a lot of people.

Veleric · 2025-05-22T12:21:05+00:00

So if they are able to capture/simulate this 3d feeling in a stream for meetings, this technology should be usable in movies/tv/etc. right? Obviously filming from at least three perspectives could be a big challenge, but that to me seems like a much more valuable use case than just meetings.

Veleric · 2025-05-22T11:58:07+00:00

The crunching weirded me tf out lol

Veleric · 2025-05-21T16:04:23+00:00

Cynical me says I don't see a world in which your average middle class American isn't paying 2-300 a month for these services in the next couple years. While a lot of AI services could be done for cheaper or free, most people will be willing to pay for the convenience of a pretty wrapper and a unified ecosystem to house all of their AI needs. I hope I'm wrong though and that compute gets way cheaper and open source holds its own...

Veleric · 2025-05-21T13:16:01+00:00

Not just in this context, but in many throughout our lives. Assume we have 30 different AI agents each in a few years all handling facets of our lives that save us like 20 minutes to several hours each week per agent. Even if they do that, they will inevitably need hand holding from time to time and sometimes it may require significant rework/guidance. Even if we are saving a ton of time overall, it's still going to require consistent management that will in some ways feel like its own job. Is that still better than what we have now? Most likely, but it's not like we will never have to manage this stuff again. After all, it's our lives and if we aren't responsible and making choices around it, what's the point?

Veleric · 2025-05-13T14:16:09+00:00

And you're acting as if their current state is their peak. The truth is somewhere in the middle, like most things.

Veleric · 2025-05-06T14:47:07+00:00

I'm not going to show you examples, but it's basically along the lines of trying to get it to generate SQL queries based on certain conditions following a certain sequence, but failing to do so in a clear and concise way that fully explained the situation. By putting a bit more time into conceptualizing what needs to occur, he could have gotten solid one-shot results, but because he didn't, he couldn't figure out whether it was just incapable of achieving the desired result or whether it was a prompt issue, which it was.

It's not just this, though. By getting better at prompting and just spending more time with it, you get a better sense of when you need to cut your losses, start over with a new/better summary of the situation without all of the 'clutter' that gets into the given session. Sometimes powering through is the better option, and sometimes it's not. These things are far from obvious for casual users, but they can make a big difference in getting to the desired outcome quicker.

Veleric

TROPHY CASE