The NASA engineers wanted to understand what would happen if large chunks of the heat shield were stripped away entirely from the composite base of Orion. So they subjected this base material to high energies for periods of 10 seconds up to 10 minutes, which is longer than the period of heating Artemis II will experience during reentry.

What they found is that, in the event of such a failure, the structure of Orion would remain solid, the crew would be safe within, and the vehicle could still land in a water-tight manner in the Pacific Ocean.

  The Avcoat blocks, which are about 1.5 inches thick, are laminated onto a thick composite base of the Orion spacecraft. Inside this is a titanium framework that carries the load of the vehicle. The NASA engineers wanted to understand what would happen if large chunks of the heat shield were stripped away entirely from the composite base of Orion. So they subjected this base material to high energies for periods of 10 seconds up to 10 minutes, which is longer than the period of heating Artemis II will experience during reentry.


  What they found is that, in the event of such a failure, the structure of Orion would remain solid, the crew would be safe within, and the vehicle could still land in a water-tight manner in the Pacific Ocean.

But he could have tried the VRChat folks, and Bigscreen. I guess he bought the Beat Saber folks, but he probably needed to buy a big game studio and maybe one with experience shipping successful MMORPGs.

That way, thinking is communication! That's kind of why I loved math so much - it felt like I could solve a problem and succinctly communicate with the reader at the same time.

I don't think the current transformers architecture is the final stop in the architectural breakthroughs we need for "AGI" that mimics human thought process. We've gone through RNN, LSTM, Mamba, Transformers, with an exponentially increasing amounts of data over the years. If we want to use similar "copy human sequences" approaches all the way to AGI, we need to continuously record human thoughts, so to speak (and yes, that makes me really queasy).

So, persisting the session, that's already available in a convenient form for AI, is also about capturing the human reasoning process during the session, and the sometimes inherent heuristics therein. I agree that it's not really useful for humans to read.

We could have LLMs ingest all these historical sessions, and use them as context for the current session. Basically treat the current session as an extension of a much, much longer previous session.

Plus, future models might be able to "understand" the limitations of current models, and use the historical session info to identity where the generated code could have deviated from user intention. That might be useful for generating code, or just more efficient analysis by focusing on possible "hotspots", etc.

Basically, it's high time we start capturing any and all human input for future models, especially open source model development, because I'm sure the companies already have a bunch of this kind of data.

  @sama: Yes, we will turn it off in that very unlikely event, but *we believe the U.S. government is an institution that does its best to follow law and policy.*

  What we won't do is turn it off because we disagree with a particular (legal military) decision. We trust their authority.

The "human approval" will be someone clicking a YES button all the time, like Israeli officers did in the Gaza bombing.

A few months down the line, OpenAI will quietly decide that their next model is safe enough for autonomous weapons, and remove their safeguard layer. The mass surveillance enablement might be an indirect deal through Palantir.

I still think a lot about the failed OpenAI coup, and how different things would be now if Microsoft hadn't backed Altman. Would this hype cycle and bubble grown so ridiculous if there were more conscientious people in charge at the front-runner? We will unfortunately never know. I really wish that board had planned out their coup better.