veridicus

My last response didn’t post for some reason. The mistake you’re making is that a neural network is not a neural simulation. It’s relatively simple math, just on a very large scale. I think you mentioned earlier, for example, you played with PyTorch. You should then know that NN stack is based on vector math. You’re making assumptions based on terminology but when you read deeper you’ll see what I mean.

No, I'm not your Google. You can easily read the background of Stable Diffusion and see it's based on Markov chains.

Yes, and the math is all publicly documented.

The AIs we're talking about are neural networks. They don't do statistics, they don't have databases, and they don't take mathematical averages. They simulate neurons, and their ability to learn concepts is emergent from that, the same way the human brain is.

This is not at all accurate. Yes, there are very immature neural simulation systems that are being prototyped but that's not what you're seeing in the news today. What the public is witnessing is fundamentally based on vector mathematics. It's pure math and there is nothing at all emergent about it.

If an artist uses a copyrighted work on their mood board or as inspiration, then they should pay for that, because they're making a profit from that copyrighted work.

That's not how copyright works, nor should it. Anyone who creates a mood board from a blank slate is using their learned experience, most of which they gathered from other works. If you were to write a book analyzing movies, for example, you shouldn't have to pay the copyright for all those movies. You can make a YouTube video right now with a few short clips from a movie or quotes from a book and you're not violating copyright. You're just not allowed to make a largely derivative work.

We already had something similar (not exactly) back in the day with mainframes. You sat at a "dumb" terminal and shared central resources. The industry moved away from that for good reason.

Then we had Unix with remote X. Mix of local and remote resources. Useful for a long time in enterprises but slow connectivity prevented it going mainstream.

Then there was an attempted resurrection with Java. People probably don't remember but the original dream was code running anywhere, either local or central, and we had services that created new "dumb" terminals. Didn't really pan out.

Now we try to build everything with web technologies. Render locally but served remotely. Very much a hack and you see constant pushback and alternatives popping up.

This remote desktop concept only really works for businesses. It simplifies IT management and enforces stronger security controls. Other than that it won't catch on.

That's not accurate. At least not entirely. I work with a few ex-Tesla managers who tell me the opposite. He would put his hands on any random detail at any time and override people.

What if everyone is making the wrong assumption about why he bought twitter? I'm convinced he didn't do it to make money. He bought it for the power, to control one of the world's largest microphones. He doesn't care about advertisers who will dictate content rules.

At SpaceX, Tesla, and other companies he hired industry experts. He's running this one completely differently and I believe his focus is politics and power instead of money.

This is the flailing desperation of a dying animal

I guarantee they did the math and the site will continue. Sure, a small percentage will leave. But they know from user metrics the vast majority of users will remain. They can find mods who will fall in line.