Making language the user interface for devices. Representing meaning for machines so they can understand us. Subscribe https://xitter.cf/t.co/5d2SwN852w

Palo Alto
Joined July 2016
“In Patom brain theory, it may also help to explain what’s going on in our relatively slow brain when contrasted with a supercomputer where the brain far exceeds the capability of the supercomputer in accuracy, speed and (low) power usage” medium.com/pat-inc/kahneman-…
1
35
Robots require a 100% accurate, trustworthy interface for language and vision with learning-on-the-fly capability. That comes with the next generation of cognitive technology
Three ways in which we're still far from AGI: - Learning algorithms don't generalize nearly as well as humans - There's no ChatGPT moment for robotics in sight - Our understanding of intelligence is severely lacking
3
133
Pat Inc retweeted
Oxford researchers just published a paper arguing LLMs cannot invent anything. Mathematically impossible. The reason is simple and brutal. A model trained to predict the next word can never believe something the existing data says is wrong. And every real breakthrough in history started with exactly that belief. In 1903 every prediction machine on Earth would have told the Wright Brothers that human flight was one to ten million years away. Nine weeks later they flew. Not because they had better data. Because they had a theory the data hadn't caught up to yet. That is the gap between AI and human thinking. LLMs mirror the past. Humans reason into a future that doesn't exist yet. Oxford just proved mathematically that those are two different things. I use these models every day. This matches what I see. The new stuff always comes from the human at the keyboard who decides the data is wrong. LLMs don't think. You do.
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
This paper published 2 years ago has zero mathmatical proofs in it at all. It contains no equations and is a conceptual essay. Claiming from it that anything is mathmatically proven is false and misleading. Original paper: pubsonline.informs.org/doi/10.1287/st…
205
543
133
1,613
217,161
Absolute genius.
Me explaining AI to friends
49
368
15
4,109
1,429,522
The thing I freaking warned founders to engineers to VCs is here. Headline in a business paper: “AI phobia is America’s new consensus” “‘Stop us before we end humanity,’ the AI titans keep telling us. Also, ‘trust me and me alone, not my competitors’” They poisoned the well and pooped in the hot tub. Two CEOs crippled by arrogance either purposely or cluelessly—injured the public perception of AI (and robots). It looks only get worse and will launch Luddite political careers and elect a new president riding on the back of this new anti AI, anti Clanker donkey. All of this could have been averted and now we are in a new Luddite timeline. This stupidity will assure a) No IPO b) Market crashing post IPO burning down. All from avertable public comments and company positions. This has a slight chance of being averted but past performance now shows future gains in doubling down in arrogance. You reading this, as much as you may or may not love this tech, are in the 1% that by comparison hold AI’s promise and peril in an educated mind. I know this because somehow my feed reached you. You represent a well thinking very small and easily trampled minority. How did this happen? Thank Dario. From his holier than tho thought pieces to his congressional and presidential emergency meetings to his almost daily fear marketing reports dressed up as academic papers he is the poster boy for the anti movement. Quite unlike any CEO in history this guy has captivated investors to suppress logic for hopes of a big exit. I do not dislike Dario personally, however his philosophies are childish and he has convinced LessThinkers to follow him over the cliff. No doubt all with the best of intentions to save us from our selves because they “know better”. The outcome of course will not be what their cos-play of a philosophy: “we are like the nuclear scientists in the manhattan project making ‘the bomb’” now has the general hard working and very stressed out rest of the world, angry and freaked out. The problem is clear when you drive across America and talk to common folks. THEY LOVED AI TWO YEARS ago. Now they have dozens of reasons to hate it. They certainly hate the poster boy and Sam (he is another story). But they will take the words of waning and fear seriously, as I expected and use this fear theater marketing from the LessWrong ivory towers as fuel to burn it all down. I spent most of this summer talking to over 300 random folks around this country and NOT ONE supports the positive things we see with AI here on X every day. NOT ONE. Bankers, doctors, nurses, lawyers, real estate, restaurant workers to high executives. In the promise this technology offered, flooded are the noise of Dario and now the press and politicians filling the mass minds with a guaranteed hatred if the tech. And no, no acceptance as Dario as savior. The meeting the pope and having the Anthropic minion mini Dario give a speech has sent many Catholics off to full hatred of AI. As I said, this can be readjusted but it takes very detailed coordination, communication and money. I did the first half for free right here : identified the problem, much to my demise as many of my colleagues are having a party, rightly so, on the great daily achievements in the industry. You folks have tolerated my obvious posting just about daily on the Anthropic game. Trust me Bro, it makes me no friends with the industry even if they don’t like the company. I am speaking up here because we have 4 months. It will be hard but if understood we have a much better future of clear thinking. If unsuccessful we have a decade of decay and world AI dominance by China, because they have nothing like an Anthropic and if they do get one: BE VERY SCARED BECAUSE THEY HAVE SOMETHING VERY POWERFUL IN AI THEY ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT AND ARE ROLLING UP THE GATES. This is the way of it. I want to be very wrong here but my track record on the future says otherwise. Pray for us.
56
59
12
249
16,292
Is it the right pattern matching to emulate our brain's comprehension? That's the gold standard for accuracy while achieving its energy efficiency as well......
Replying to @GaryMarcus
No, these are search-driven results, not conceptual breakthroughs. They demonstrate that a model with enough compute can explore mathematical spaces we cannot feasibly brute-force. They do not demonstrate new mathematical intuition, taste, or theory-building. Its advanced pattern matching.
2
111
Pat Inc retweeted
Replying to @Grady_Booch
It’s seems that talk of consciousness and the replacement of all human jobs is lacking the capabilities necessary
1
2
222
Pat Inc retweeted
Free newsletter: The OpenAI Bubble, my comprehensive, 15k word thesis about why the AI Bubble and the AI Trade were inflated by OpenAI and can't exist without it, who will be the victims of the bubble bursting, and how we can stop it from happening again. wheresyoured.at/the-openai-b…
24
157
18
667
203,734
Today is a huge win for creatives around the world, as Australia makes it clear it will not bow to pressure from AI companies to legalise the theft of creatives’ work. From the Australian Prime Minister: "No company should use Australian books, music, art or news to build or train AI without the artist’s control. That includes the artist’s control of the price and value of their work. Anything less, is theft." Strong, principled words that should serve as a model for governments everywhere. theguardian.com/technology/2…
42
734
63
2,534
224,414
“I asked a few AI researchers whether they could name any other real-world software that scales so poorly. None of them could think of any. Even outside the world of software, it’s hard to find a comparable example, given that economy of scale is the principle that has made light bulbs, cars, and clothing so affordable. By economic and engineering measures, generative AI might be the worst technology ever deployed” @_alexreisner @TheAtlantic In “Generative AI is an engineering disaster” theatlantic.com/technology/2…
95
372
36
1,313
86,519
Is it a sign of disillusionment when technooptimist @BrianRoemmele sounds *exactly* like me:? Here he writes that we risk an AI winter from “Over-promising relative to capabilities: Ambitious public claims outpaced demonstrated performance in open-ended environments.”
6
20
2
89
16,090
“The era of the confident hallucination, backstopped by a disclaimer, is getting shorter.” — Wesley Edits medium.com/actuallythough/go…
2
25
“First, it ruled that AI Overviews don’t surface existing web pages. They synthesize, evaluate, and recombine content to generate new, independent statements in Google’s own voice. That makes Google the author, not the intermediary.” — Wesley Edits medium.com/actuallythough/go…
1
31
Pat Inc retweeted
Really grateful that @chrislhayes and @MSNOWNews gave me the space to talk about the unsustainable economics of AI, subsidized subscriptions, and why generative AI is nothing like Uber or Amazon Web Services.
Had a great time talking to @chrislhayes for his AI End Game series on @MSNOWNews , covering the AI bubble, the SaaSpocalypse, the end of tech's era of hypergrowth, and the underlying economic fragility of data centers and the greater AI industry. youtube.com/watch?v=-Mn-TNLw…
17
136
3
775
50,744
Pat Inc retweeted
My appearance on Bloomberg last week ruffled some feathers because I don't have "skin in the game" (IE: money in the market). This is because AI boosters can't imagine somebody with a moral position on an industry run by grifters and sold with lies. wheresyoured.at/ai-is-slowin…
7
32
2
313
8,242
Let me trace the timeline here because nobody's connecting it. Step 1: Scrape the entire internet. Every book, every article, every conversation, every piece of art, every forum post. Do it without asking. Do it without paying. Step 2: Train a model on all of it. Call it "artificial intelligence." Step 3: Go to BlackRock's Infrastructure Summit and announce: "We see a future where intelligence is a utility, like electricity or water, and people buy it from us on a meter." Step 3 is where you sell people's own knowledge back to them. On a meter. They took the collective output of human thought, compressed it into a model, and now they want to charge you by the token to access a version of what you and everyone you know already created. One Reddit user put it perfectly: "They stole all this data from us, the people, our life's work, creativity, art, by devouring the internet and blowing through all copyright laws. Now they want to sell it back to us in the form of a utility." Imagine if someone photocopied every book in the public library, burned the library down, and then opened a subscription service for the copies. That's the metered intelligence business model. And they're pitching it to infrastructure investors as though they invented water.
This Post is from a suspended account. Learn more
3,205
45,565
2,104
134,186
5,791,822