Perhaps also symmetric "freedom to learn" from OpenAI models, with some provisions / naming convention? U.S. labs are limited in this way, while labs in China are not.

- UMG Recordings, Inc.

- Capitol Records, LLC

- Concord Bicycle Assets, LLC

- CMGI Recorded Music Assets LLC

- Sony Music Entertainment

- Arista Music

Taken from: https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/UMG-v...

And no, I don't think the knowledge of language is necessary. To give a concrete example, tokens from TinyStories dataset (the dataset size is ~1GB) are known to be sufficient to bootstrap basic language.

And note, the system is now directly competing with "interns". Once the accuracy is competitive (is it already?) with an average "intern", there'd be fewer reasons to hire paid "interns" (more expensive than $200/month). Which is maybe a good thing? Fewer kids wasting their time/eyes looking at the computer screens?

This is far from the case — many areas are characterized by heavy-tailed loss distributions, where extreme negative consequences could really ruin the day and erase any efficiency gains.

In your particular case the prompt would look something like: what are the plants that aren't poisonous to most people?

A general reasoner would recover language and relevant world model from pubmed dump. And then would proceed to reason about it, to perform the task.

It doesn't look like a particularly efficient process.

On the other hand, my take on it, the ability to do reasoning in a long context is a general capability. And my guess is that it can be bootstrapped from scratch, without having to do training on all of the internet or having to distill models trained on the internet.

Emergent tool use from multi-agent interaction is a good example - https://openai.com/index/emergent-tool-use/

> Thought about large prime check for 3m 52s: "Despite its interesting pattern of digits, 12,345,678,910,987,654,321 is definitely not prime. It is a large composite number with no small prime factors."

Feels like this Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences (OEIS) would be a good candidate for a hallucination benchmark...

This brings computers into the classroom, and once they’re available, it is a slippery slope. It is easier for teachers to have students use semi-gamified "educational" apps rather than engage themselves.

Example for K-2 - https://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/documents/csstandards.pdf:

  K-2.CS.1 Select and operate computing devices that perform a variety of tasks accurately and quickly based on user needs and preferences.

  K-2.CS.2 Explain the functions of common hardware and software components of computing systems.

  K-2.CS.3 Describe basic hardware and software problems using accurate terminology.

  K-2.NI.4 Model and describe how people connect to other people, places, information and ideas through a network.

  ...

  K–2 K-2.AP.12 Create programs with sequences of commands and simple loops, to express ideas or address a problem

  K-2.IC.20 Describe approaches and rationales for keeping login information private, and for logging off of devices appropriately

Imagine my frustration one day, when I've discovered that my kindergartner has full access to a brand-new, shiny iPad during class. Despite complaints from parents, the teacher refused to reduce iPad usage (or even activate Screen Distance and Screen Time controls on the iPad, or share usage statistics).

The only thing that I've learned, this is all in line with California’s state-approved computer literacy recommendations.

Like FTC, I estimate that banning these would save U.S. consumers millions of hours they currently spend searching and clicking on pointless coupons on their phones before making purchases. It would also increase happiness, as it's extremely annoying to pay $20 extra, knowing that a lower price is available if only you spent ten minutes struggling with a store's website on your phone.

Whoever invented this is evil and is destroying happiness.

Like FTC, I estimate that banning these would save U.S. consumers millions of hours they currently spend searching and clicking on pointless coupons on their phones before making purchases. It would also increase happiness, as it's extremely annoying to pay $20 extra, knowing that a lower price is available if only you spent ten minutes struggling with a store's website on your phone.

Whoever invented this is evil and is destroying happiness.