But I guess it's inevitable when you try to paint individual lives through pure statistics.

My read on DHH is that he's simply a sheltered 40 something rich guy who just has the most surface takes on political things, mainly influenced by whatever he sees on Twitter. He lives in Malibu, CA for one thing. If you're working in tech in California you'll definitely be working right along with many engineers from China or India. Both of which would be marked as non desirable by nativist parties in the UK.

Hell even himself as a Dane would be.

https://www.meta.com/thefutureisforeveryone/

Pushes for export controls on China who have released open weights on much more powerful models than Meta (and I believe that trend's not changing any time soon). I guess open models are bad if they're communist.

The entire essay has not one mention of the Metaverse, that little thing they spent $80b on and rebranded the whole company around.

As usual, the only centralised power Zuck hates is one that isn't in his own hands.

If they just memorise the answer any smart teacher can trip them up by just rephrasing things or developing tangents to see understanding.

In school before exams, I'd often make little cheat sheets about things that you'd need to memorise like formulas for areas and volumes or certain physics equations (we weren't allowed any reference material for that on exams). The very act of writing them all down before the exam would often boost my memory enough to the point I'd just recall them.

Code is more opaque, an ugly unmaintainable mess can still create a decently functioning game experience from the player's pov. There's infamous examples of some very shitty code still resulting in games people adore.

Ultimately your point stands, if the product is genuinely good and appeals to people, they will like to buy it and play it no matter how the sausage was actually made. AI generation just ruins the signal though, it's tougher to find the jewels among the sea of slop and that'll affect how consumers judge your product.

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/udFuYqqNdpdo5ym3f/genuine-qu...

>So far, the Anthropic corporate structure of a public benefit corporation with a few powerful co-founders, has best weathered the corrupting nature of success. The corporation should probably be heavily weighted to the founders by using dual-class shares to preserve voting power at the expense of beneficial ownership—the point of GAs is not to make money, but to save humans.

Did they introduce stronger plant breeds at this year’s Ayahuasca retreats?

Or did his SF network show him what VCs are throwing billions at and FOMO kicked in?

Call me a cynic but I’m not buying this save the world nonsense from Silicon valley. Not in 2026.

I'm not sure how static training data is either (or how you'd distribute it considering its size and nevermind the legality of sharing copyrighted things).

You'd likely get a model with very similar behaviour but the weights would be different.

Please someone correct me if I'm wrong.

But if models will be commodities, maybe that won't be such a terrible thing longterm?

Everyone's just portraying a strawman of the other side with new formats.

To me the issue is that everything becomes written in the same style pattern. I don't know why but if I spot it I wince internally and immediately skim the post or just outright stop reading. A large part of it is overexposure. For me it's made browsing the internet quite uncomfortable since it's unavoidable.

I mainly spend my online time in group chats these days.