This is what's known as a category error; an LLM is a 'model', not an algorithm.

It's not even an accurate claim; LLMs predict the next token, not the next word.

> AI is essentially copy paste with more steps

What about when AI creates a limerick about a kubernetes cluster run by Buddhist Monks? Or any number of other novel creations?

Fortunately the courts recognized the transformative use involved in making a model, which is fair use of copyrighted works, in kadrey v meta platforms.

> The most infurating thing however is how AI companies sidestep the IP rights of authors

transformative use falls under fair use, permission from authors is not needed to use legally acquired copyright works for training. Kadrey v Meta Platforms and Bartz v Anthropic.

> but then claim to own those IP rights when their own generated output leaks.

Corporations gonna do corporate things. Blatant hypocrisy is par for the course. Organize and take them to court.

Anthropic just kneecapped themselves, and possibly OpenAI and Google as well, with their FUD strategy that got fable shutdown by the government.

But that doesn't impact Chinese providers. Then can US companies get investments for expensive model development if they can't actually sell those models-as-a-service?

In the meantime, open source will continue its march onward because while slower, it's completely open source, and the models are already good enough to improve their own work as well as build out the next gen of models.

All those $Billions of investments in AI Datacenters? Up in smoke if the models that are capable of replacing humans can't actually be used.

I wonder if 2008 style bailouts will be needed, soon.

That trillion-$SpaceX valuation based on $14B+$10B infusion from Anthropic and Google? Heard they have short-notice cancellation clauses.

Either this rule is rescinded quickly or the bubble bursts. Which shall it be? I know which one I'm betting on; do you?

Tell me, Mr. Anderson, what good is an ai-model, if it can't speak?

They should have consulted their own models about the ramifications and unintended consequences; based on their actions over the past few months I think it is safe to say that the models are smarter than the decision-makers at anthropic, lol. I know the models are smarter than I am and even I could have told them that they were taking paths, FUD for example, that would lead to grief.

The ruling also lessened the free speech rights for AI. This is a big one. In conjunction with holding an operator liable for its AI's doings, that will lead to interesting cases where conduct that would have been previously protected under free speech rights will become a liability. Basically, machine-based cognitive capability becomes a liability when it is customer-facing.

We may also discover that einstein-rosen bridges exist [1] or that aliens exist or that magic is real or that astrology works. Hopefully none of these things are keeping you up at night.

Also, broken clocks, twice a day right, etc etc. Clocks still broken.

> Then what??

Plenty of dystopian sci-fi available for your reading/viewing pleasure. [2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dystopian_literature

Ah yes, folks fighting the good Malthusian fight since 1798, and yet to see a win. LoL. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malthusianism#Criticism

Freedom of movement for labor is absolutely critical to counterbalance the freedom of movement that capital has, otherwise it leads to mass exploitation of labor and rising levels of inequality, which leads to, well, the French approach to the bourgeois problem.

Hard LOL. Doesn't apply at borders. Any country borders.

Also https://xkcd.com/538/

The future is a bit fuzzy, always. That said, here's my take on it.

> Transition to f-ing what though?

Not jobs. Those will be gone once ai can do them cheaper than humans. ai can already do many (most?) of them better than humans. The jury is still out on the cost aspect. Judging by r/LocalLlama, the lower cost is not that far off. There may be some structural adjustments around compute pricing before that happens, though.

In the EU, humans will probably be ok. They have a strong tradition of focus on human needs. Because of lower average salaries [1] than the US [2], human employment will likely carry on longer as well.

In the US, those folks that have capital will likely be ok. They'll be able to purchase services from ai companies and invest in ai companies and corporate armed forces (ai-populated, not human) to protect the Haves. Those that don't have capital? Who knows? America hates poor people, women and minorities.

China? No idea. Though I hear that their demographics are upside-down, so there'll be fewer people to support over the long-term. That they'll supply the robotics and goods for the rest of the world is not in doubt: cheaper electricity from solar/wind, advanced ai and robotic tech, science and industry moving forward while the US regresses, hard.

India? Hard to say. No social net of any consequence. Not enough capital to go full ai/robotics, human labor way cheaper than ai/robotic labor at the moment, so maybe they'll survive as that last major bastion of human work for some time to come. But their economy is growing, and they have a lot of people, so at some point they'll come to that same fork in the road. Hopefully they'll have serious social safety nets by that time.

Africa? In a lot of ways, they're similar to India on the human labor costs side, so their future hasn't been written yet either. India can probably fend off an invasion by rapacious US corporates with ai/robotic armies looking for resources because of sheer numbers, but Africa, fragmented, is a different story. Maybe China will be their friend? If you think this scenario is outlandish, look into the history of European companies colonizing the world. You didn't think the East India Company with its massive private armies were government-owned, did you? Likewise with the Spanish/Dutch/Portugese expansions. The govt. takeovers didn't happen until much later, tens of decades later.

South America? They're an interesting case. Brazil may take a trajectory similar to the EU. Chile, Ecuador, Uruguay too. The others are a ?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_European_Union [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_United_States

China liberalized their economy in the 70s: 1976 Mao dies -> Cultural revolution ends -> 1978 Deng Xiaoping launches 'Reform & Opening Up'.

India liberalized their economy in the 90s: 1991 Rao and Singh come to power -> eliminate tariffs, dismantle the License Raj.

The difference is at least that of compounded growth over time. At 7% real growth, in 13 years an economy gains about 2.4x. In PPP terms, China's economy is about 2.4x India's [1].

Additional factors to consider are that China liberalized more aggressively through state directed experimentation, and India liberalized more gradually, and within a democratic legal system. Also, on the Chinese side there were periods of slowdown (1989, others), and on the Indian side the economy would have been about 20% larger but for the right-wing/fascist policies of the BJP government [2][3]. But policy failures on both sides are probably a wash, bringing us to today's gap.

[1] https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDP_RPCH@WEO/OEMDC/...

[2] https://www.hks.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/centers/cid/...

[3] https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/india/ill-conceived-demo...

Science and Educational purposes are valid 501(c)(3) purposes. A donation to a 501(c)(3) that funds open-source scientific software, public STEM education, basic research, science grants, or public-interest tech research can be deductible.

Up to 60% of Adjusted Gross Income can be tax-deductible as charitable contributions to a qualified 501(c)(3) with itemization, depending on the contribution type.

This would create a non-partisan defined/dedicated non-profit funding layer with serious governance that will benefit all sides. Might be possible to go global.

This would need serious structure: independent board, conflict-of-interest rules, grant review, public reporting, no private benefit, and probably fiscal sponsorship first.

Maybe this deserves a separate Ask HN to avoid derailing this thread: would people here actually support or help design a 501(c)(3)-style vehicle for public-benefit science and technology funding?

  > Norway is the 5th largest weapons and defense manufacturer

  > while the so called Oil Fund doesn't directly invest in them, Kongsberg is 50% state owned.

  > Glad Norway's oil fund has some sense and is above the virtue signaling of the Danes.

  > so called Oil Fund

  [1] https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/2026-03/fs_2603_at_2025.pdf
  [2] https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/2025-11/fs_2512_top_100_2024.pdf
  [3] https://nordicdefencereview.com/operating-in-more-than-40-countries-kongsberg-norway-2024-performance-review-and-growth-outlook-kongsberg-norway-2024-results-and-growth-trajectory/
  [4] https://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/6052795/aerospace-and-defense-in-norway
  [5] https://www.sipri.org/media/press-release/2025/sipri-top-100-arms-producers-see-combined-revenues-surge-states-rush-modernize-and-expand-arsenals

  > Sadly, education does not correct psychopathic traits, which might be overrepresented in c-suites, and selected for in politicians.
  >> Seems to me the venn diagram of "congress and c-suites" vs "educated people" would have one circle wholly inside the other.

  > look no further than the massive amount of debt we saddle on kids.

  > I didn't learn a _thing_ in college that I haven't learned better either at $dayjob, or from reading.

  > College/education lost the plot. The sooner we admit it, the sooner we can fix it.

What alternative do you propose? For humans, and AI?

  [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_higher-learning_institutions
  [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_universities_in_continuous_operation

Sadly, education does not correct psychopathic traits, which might be overrepresented in c-suites, and selected for in politicians.

It might be critical for humanity to identify and edit out these traits in ai, while we can.

Remember when the frontier labs found out that curated high-quality training was critical to making better models?

Basically, just like high-quality and more education tends to make better humans, on average, I think we can expect quality education to turn out better ai, on average, and with better repeatability than with humans because of better control over the initial conditions and environment.

A 'regular' autoencoder is a neural network trained to compress data and then reconstruct it.

A neuromorphic autoencoder is instead implemented using brain-inspired computing elements like spiking neurons, event-driven updates, local interactions, sometimes specialized hardware. In this paper, looks like the autoencoder is being used as a structured energy-minimizing circuit for an Ising optimization problem. The architecture manipulates Ising clauses rather than only pairwise spin interactions.

Ordinary artificial neurons compute matrix ops such as y=f(Wx+b), while this uses artificial neurons that accumulate input, which emit a spike when they cross a threshold, like biological neurons (event driven neural dynamics).

[1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-026-71937-4

Ah yes, the fox guarding the chicken-coop; the auditors are to verify that the fox is indeed guarding the chicken-coop per the standards the fox has set. No mention of disappearing chickens anywhere in the standards.

Answering the implied statement - pensions invest in PE only to the tune of about 14%. [1]

[1] https://publicplansdata.org/quick-facts/national/