Right, that's the question I struggle to interpret as good faith, but I'll try to answer! For me, the whole concept of online forums is interacting with semi-anonymous humans (and I believe that's why many (most?) ban bots), but also the slogan is "science by humans" and that seems to be their general brand direction:

https://www.physicsforums.com/

But I worry the focus is on the word "human" too much. My complaint is attribution, which applies to any account on the site, human or otherwise.

Since you continue to sidestep the implications of my rhetorical question, I'd ask it non-rhetorically:

Why would anybody make an account on an "expert discussion" site to be misrepresented? Why would anybody, be it you or me or whoever you like, want that?

In my mind this destroys the core value proposition of the site: reputation. If this is a clever pivot than I could use some help understanding the intended direction.

For millennia we created documents supporting the geocentric model, all wrong! How'd we break out of that rut?

I don't know if AI are currently equipped to deal with this as humans did, but maybe they can be?

Are you excited to generate an account and communicate with experts such as the ones in the article today?

This is just as true for guns as drones. Both need fast reactions and fine control. A human cannot control a swarm of drones any better than they can control a swarm of guns, but you can add autonomy (sensors, actuators, compute) to either to get some of those capabilities back.

Conventional munitions will always be more economical. It's hard to beat a few grams of steel in price per kill. Drones are only relatively cheap when compared to rifles, but they're actually replacing bullets/bombs. Great for high value targets, less great for indiscriminate killing.

    curl https://api.openai.com/v1/resposes \
    [...]
    "model": "gpt-6-astrai",
    [...]
    
    openai resposes create \
    --model gpt-6-astrai \
    [...]

How no?

https://blog.jim-nielsen.com/2025/icons-in-menus/

A related post linked to by the previous post:

https://tonsky.me/blog/tahoe-icons/

Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute says that dispersants caused a drastic reduction in surface volatiles, allowing the cleanup crew to work longer and more efficiently.

> The model showed that, without dispersants, the atmospheric concentration of benzene would have been about 6,000 times higher. Benzene concentrations in the air two meters above the sea surface would have been 13 times higher than the levels considered acceptable to breathe during a 10-hour working day or a 40-hour work week, based on guidelines by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). However, the model showed that with the dispersant injection, atmospheric benzene concentrations were typically about 500 times lower than acceptable NIOSH levels.

https://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/feature/did-dispersants-help-du...

While not an LLM, protein folding is now often done via transformer.

> No, it's getting less efficient at an exponential rate without proportional performance gains

AI is expanding in both directions. Sure, it's eating the world with its compute demand and the bitter lesson bites, but we're also seeing drastically improved efficiencies employed alongside. The cost per task is dropping fast.

> The goal of these LLM companies is to funnel all economic activity through their models.

That's what all companies want, AI or otherwise.

No arguments here on the ethics of AI companies though.