Apparently a well-known event where authors gave away a ton of free ebooks led to people getting their Kindles locked down and reset due to a fraud detector falsely flagging it as suspicious activity.

I found one single article about it

But this is a representative Reddit thread

Unfortunately actually working in bio/med didn't go well despite training for it aggressively and working her ass off given that she graduated at the perfect time to compete for entry-level positions with recently laid-off people with 5+ years of experience. Between that and chronic illness in the family will all the associated experience with the failings of our medical system I'm actually pretty sympathetic to the biohackers from a purely ideological perspective, but these people are just begging for a disaster.

Beyond reading through and enthusiastically agreeing with everything you had, she did say that if you're working on anything consumable or injectable using 3D printed parts at all is going to be a red flag. Your first two pieces of equipment should be an autoclave and a fume hood, at which point you're better off working with all glass for durability and not melting reasons. Making your work space actually sterile and sufficiently free of contaminants to do any of this jnt be first place is also going to be a pain, require a lot of tape and curtains and the like, and probably not work as well as you'd want.

Also even working in a proper university lab with a fume hood and climate controls you still get sufficiently different results that the mk1 eyeball is utterly insufficient for identification. You'll learn worse than nothing.

I read through this with my wife who actually did a whole course of organic chemistry, pre-med, etc. Her reaction to your criticisms was largely "of course you would have to do that and that'd be a pain in the ass but it's definitely doable." And I feel like that's probably true but at the same time as a reasonably smart dude this is the first time I've heard the majority of these words.

It feels like they're reacting to the same tendency in tech culture that I've complained about before where specialized knowledge and domain expertise are treated like arcane revelations from beyond. It's not that your average person is incapable of understanding or going through the relevant processes; Cs ,as the saying goes, get degrees and I'm sure many of the labs actually doing this work at scale are staffed largely by those C students. But it's also worth acknowledging that there is a level of investment in time and resources required to actually do it and this kind of "you have nothing to lose but your pharmacological chains" rhetoric is dramatically underselling how difficult those processes are and how bad the consequences can be if you screw it up. Anyone who wants to try should first read The Iliad, the Oedipus cycle, and at least one other epic-sized meditation on hubris. And the once you've forged ahead read the relevant books on actually following the process for the love of God.

Wait is that all it's doing? Google the prompt, take the first result, append it to the prompt, feed to LLM?

And I'm sure he's sent several notices explicitly declaring that lack of contract between them that a judge evaluating the lien would be interested in.

I mean, if you're talking specifically in context about people with vaginas instead of women then using the gendered term does exclude both women without vaginas and men with them who are probably a relevant group in that context. But seriously how often does that come up for you? How often is the most important part of the woman you're referring to her anatomy?

And while "females" is probably just as accurate in most contexts it's also been poisoned with incel vibes at this point and it's gonna be some time before it can be salvaged for general use outside of specific biological contexts without sounding like you're about to unload a whole lot of baggage into the thread instead of getting therapy.

Past a certain point it's easier for people to cut the genAI out of the picture and just actually draw the shit they're being asked for rather than badger the machine into creating something satisfactory, at which point irony will be well and truly dead.

Oh hey we got all the way to Pacific time without anyone wishing a generic Merry Christmas. May your family's Wi-Fi work for everyone with minimal support required.

They have enough money to make it complex, no matter how simple the underlying issue.

Honestly it's either that or some rosewattasttone level translation errors which sounds like a pretty good risk to take for me.

So the guys who have been burning almost as much VC money as they have water and electricity in the name of building AGI have announced that they're totally gonna do it this time? Just a few more training runs man I swear this time we're totally gonna turn everyone into paperclips just let me have a few more runs.

Not gonna lie, "enforcing the line between ketchup and tomato sauce" isn't the sort of thing I'd expect the government to be into, but I guess I'm not mad about it?

Gotta be cheaper than buying new planes which would also have new engines. Generally there needs to be a pretty substantial increase in capability before it's worth retiring an existing platform, especially in a logistics role where you don't get as much benefit from the bleeding edge because nobody's supposed to be shooting at you in the first place.

I think the missing piece here is that B-52 isn't just a pretty good cargo hauler, it's a pretty good cargo hauler that we don't need to buy a whole new airframe to get. Think of it less as "we're commissioning these B-52s" and more as "hey look we found a way to use all these B-52s we already had" only this just keeps working forever.

It's not an exhaustive search technique, but it may be an effective heuristic if anyone is planning The Revolution(tm).

AI could be a viable test for bullshit jobs as described by Graeber. If the disinfotmatron can effectively do your job then doing it well clearly doesn't matter to anyone.

I mean, doesn't somebody still need to validate that those keys only get to people over 18? Either you have a decentralized authority that's more easily corrupted or subverted or else you have the same privacy concerns at certificate issuance rather than at time of site access.

I mean, the whole point of declaring this era post-truth is that these people have basically opted out of consensus reality.

Why don't they just hire a wizard to cast an anti-tiktok spell over all of Australia instead? It would be just as workable and I know a guy who swears he can do it for cheaper than whatever server costs they're gonna try and push.

Okay apparently it was my turn to subject myself to this nonsense and it's pretty obvious what the problem is. As far as citations go I'm gonna go ahead and fall back to "watching how a human toddler learns about the world" which is something I'm sure most AI researchers probably don't have experience with as it does usually involve interacting with a woman at some point.

In the real examples that he provides, the system isn't "picking up the wrong goal" as an agent somehow. Instead it's seeing the wrong pattern. Learning "I get a pat on the head for getting to the bottom-right-est corner of the level" rather than "I get a pat on the head when I touch the coin." These are totally equivalent in the training data, so it's not surprising that it's going with the simpler option that doesn't require recognizing "coin" as anything relevant. This failure state is entirely within the realms of existing machine learning techniques and models because identifying patterns in large amounts of data is the kind of thing they're known to be very good at. But there isn't any kind of instrumental goal establishing happening here as much as the system is recognizing that it should reproduce games where it moves in certain ways.

This is also a failure state that's common in humans learning about the world, so it's easy to see why people think we're on the right track. We had to teach my little on the difference between "Daddy doesn't like music" and "Daddy doesn't like having the Blaze and the Monster Machines theme song shout/sang at him when I'm trying to talk to Mama." The difference comes in the fact that even as a toddler there's enough metacognition and actual thought going on that you can help guide them in the right direction, rather than needing to feed them a whole mess of additional examples and rebuild the underlying pattern.

And the extension of this kind of pattern misrecognition into sci-fi end of the world nonsense is still unwarranted anthropomorphism. Like, we're trying to use evidence that it's too dumb to learn the rules of a video game as evidence that it's going to start engaging in advanced metacognition and secrecy.