Lugh

I wonder will we look back at stuff like this as the very beginnings of recursive self-improvement by artificial intelligence.

Could be, but isn’t, which is where some regulations probably need to come in.

I assume also that the technological side of things is far from perfected, but that will improve over time.

There's no reason it couldn't be a closed system, where any fertilizer that doesn't become part of the crop biomass is recycled. In theory it should be more sustainable than existing agriculture and use less fertilizer per kg of crop produced.

For anybody interested in such things, this guy is one of the best English language news sources on Chinese space developments.

Active euthanasia is legal in a few countries for terminally ill patients.

That doesn't seem an accurate description of the situation. Yes, doctors and nurses sometimes 'help people along' in their final hours or even days, that is not the same thing as the euthanasia being described here.

As sad as this topic is, this is a much better way to go than a prolonged miserable painful death where you suffer the last months of a terminal disease.

I wonder with all the billions investors are pouring into OpenAI, did they even hire one single competent lawyer? Maybe they sacked them when they got rid of all the ethics people.

No shit

It's obvious to some of us, but not to many. Hence why it's so important to keep saying it. Particularly at a UN summit about the future.

It's bizarre that in 2024 the UN permanent security council has two European countries (three if you count Russia as Europe) and zero representation from Africa, India or South America. It seems like a strange relic from the past where France and the British Empire were still world powers.

People often criticize the UN for being a toothless talking shop. While that criticism has plenty of merit, it still has some effectiveness.

In particular, this shows a commitment to the direction of travel of global society in the 21st century. It recognizes the danger of AI and warfare and of warfare spreading to outer space.

I was surprised by how much of it was about rejecting current models of financing and International Development. Again, there is only a weak commitment to concrete action right now, but it indicates where majority thinking is heading.

With the issue of hallucinations. There is no sign of a solution to this problem and it renders much of the potential applications useless. It doesn't matter in art generation, but I would never want to trust it with a life or death decision, or even one that was slightly important.

*So, what exactly is this device? That remains one of the biggest questions. According to The Times, Ive and Altman have discussed how generative AI could revolutionize the way people interact with computers. Their vision is to create a device that can handle complex tasks far beyond the capabilities of traditional software. It’s rumored that last year’s discussions were inspired by touchscreen technology, potentially taking cues from the original iPhone.

I am simultaneously intrigued and mystified. I'm trying to figure out how a combination of a touchscreen and generated AI could be a revolutionary new advanced way to interact with software. I guess we will have to wait and see.

I think renewable energy's decentralized nature is one of its most underappreciated features. You could never imagine a local community building a conventional electricity plant, they are centralized and that is the job of government.

I suspect the future will have much more local decentralized projects of this nature. When you can have robots running factories without the need for humans, why not self-finance and build these at the community level too? It's entirely feasible, and many people will want to do such things. It's initiatives like this that make me doubt the future will be dystopian.