Sigh

Wow, that's quite the statement about the excellency of our institutions. Does not seem likely but, what the hell, I'll take my oversized dose of positivity for today!

The would be quite a novel burden, that no other tech (afaik) had to carry so far. We always assumed some operator responsibility. It's interesting to think of AI as a tech that could feasible be able to internally guardrail itself, and, maybe more so with increasing capability, no human can be expected to do so in it's stead – but, surely, some limits must apply and the more interesting question is what they are, as with any other tool?

So by your estimation, for rogue actors being able to uncover hundreds of this class in each major software product roughly for free would not be a big issue?

It's much the dynamic between parents and a child. The child, with limited hindsight, almost zero insight and no ability to forecast, is annoyed by their parents. Nothing bad ever happens! Why won't parents stop being so worried all the time and make a fuss over nothing?

The parents, which the child somewhat starts to realize but not fully, have no clue what they are doing. There is a lot they don't know and are going to be wrong about, because it's all new to them. But, what they do have is a visceral idea of how bad things could be and that's something they have to talk to their child about too.

In the eyes of the parents the child is % dead all the time. Assigning the wrong % makes you look like an idiot and not being able to handle any % too. In the eyes of the child actions leading to death are not even a concept. Hitting the right balance is probably hard, but not for the reasons the child thinks.

Nobody has to proof anything. It can give your claim credibility. If you don't provide any, an opposing claim without proof does not get any better.

> cutting ~75% of tokens while keeping full technical accuracy.

I have no clue if this claim holds, but alas, just pretending they did not address the obvious criticism, while they did, is at the very least pretty lazy.

An explanation that explains nothing is not very interesting.

The naivety around this has been staggering quite frankly. All of a sudden, people thinking that meta etc are releasing free models because they believe in open access and distribution of knowledge. No, they just suck comparatively. There is nothing to sell. Using it to recruit and generate attention is the best play for them.

This is all fine (and might even be true) but not having to fill in the gaps with anecdotal data and wishful thinking is precisely what good statistics are for. Bad statistics, on the other hand, make for a bad conversation starter because everyone is confused and it gets worse from there.

https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2025/electric-...

Where does it say that?

It sends to OpenRouter if you chose to use OpenRouter. Can use Ollama. Idk how to get more local than that? Any tool will be non-local, when you do something explicitly non-local.