I can't speak too much to pilots/drivers, but the radiology example is a bit more complex than the author implies. From a regulatory perspective the AI cannot do their jobs, but in reality it has done a lot of it for many years now. We don't really know how to approve AI to replace them.
Have to admit, when she got to talking about consensus amongst agents, I shed a tear that there was no mention of blockchain
(Only 68% sarcastic there too)
I think you’re doing weaving a significant injustice. It was absolutely a sociotechnical thing and we have lost a lot of weaves.
Not saying it’s as complex as swdev but skilled artisans were doing complex stuff that just now doesn’t happen. Substitutability doesn’t mean 100% like for like.
@topper.me.uk I tried to be more positively curious but you whacked the nail on the head. All aboard the feature train as we shovel the prompts into the AI bonfire all day and all night. Snowpiercer but it creates the environmental catastrophe
Get out
Epstein-Barr Virus #EBV was linked to #MultipleSclerosis - now a plausible cause has been found, misidentification by longterm memory T-cells that pick on the wrong protein, ANO2, instead of the EBV-antigen. Massive inflection towards the elimination of MS!!!
🧪🧠Cell www.cell.com/cell/fulltex...
The seizure of the wonderful network we spent years building on Twitter, and its perversion into this filthy tool for slugs, will forever stain everyone involved.
I think it’s smart from FIFA, who’ve never let their conscience get in the way of business. Trump has threatened to exclude ppl from WC 26 many times, this was likely done to get him onside with it going ahead
Not just hard to admit: politically difficult. Anything that “fails” is a waste of tax payer money. But also Govts must not pick winners! Therefore acceptable remaining option is do little/nothing. Public sector role in tech is contested.
Not sure if I should promote this but looks interesting 😅
(Sake of clarity: it’s not me)
It would be less bad if it were just the EMEA AFD service down. This also brought down the Azure admin portal and, inter alia, made it difficult/impossible to access a bunch of other services and records. I hope the Azure retro will address this fact specifically.
I've vaguely lost count of the number of "globally resilient" services that Azure offers that turn out to have extremely large blast radius. AFD specifically is supposed to be the answer to most concerns about availability.
For those hosted on Azure Front Door, or simply trying to access the Azure admin portal, it turns out a single rogue customer (probably accidentally) enabled a config that took out their EMEA deployment:
Now maybe BlueSky isn’t the answer, maybe it’ll get eaten up too and we should all be on Mastodon. But the people who say “BlueSky is dying” just misunderstand where the world is going.
Secondary school here sent a notification to parents that kids were watching the video out of school, and maybe the parents should check what they’re watching.
The warning that it was too graphic for Reddit was enough for me to realise I don’t want that on my retinas.
Sign up to FIFA World Cup clearly a mistake. I’m first offered a “right to buy” a ticket plus some digital NFT BS for a few hundred bucks.
Given RTBs are “tradable” I’m vaguely assuming this unlocks scalping as a service, albeit at low volumes. Inescapably awful.
I do wonder if there will specifically be an AI burst. It’s reasonable to say atm that AI is propping up everything - eg S&P-mag7 is flat - but there’s a small chance of just general “burst”. The timing of that could be very interesting from an AI pov, either cushioning or deepening 😬
I agree there's a uncontrollable vulnerability, I don't think it equates to accepting guaranteed failure - people will run agents doing this stuff and be mostly fine. That's why I say it's about risk appetite: ppl will weigh the balance differently
Yeah, to be clear, I'm just comparing risk appetite, I think the risk profile and threat model is v. different - I think it's simplistic to say "LLMs can never do this" in situations where we let people do the same, because we can & do tolerate risk.
No, I'm just pointing out that the risks are not that different. Staff are a security weak spot; we know this, this is why phishing works. Training, MFA, etc. are all sticking plasters, you can't control this perfectly. There are similar plasters for LLMs. It's down to risk tolerance.
Worth noting that staff accountability is somewhat limited, though. E.g. if staff breach customer personal data in the UK: the liability is on the employer (e.g. Co-op judgment). With that in mind, I can imagine companies deciding an LLM is a better bet.
I get from a tech perspective it looks risky. But it's also equivalent to the existing risk with staff, who are capable of doing all these things. I wonder if the tolerance for accepting these risks is high as other software vulns.
Clearly we need petition for “orthogonal” (as in Lewis, SQ1). Need to get Brundle to double click on that one.
Bundle and Crofty claiming “suboptimal” and “learnings” as “F1 words”. Bad news for you fellas
Roadside is sometimes quick though. I’m happy to pay a good chunk extra for 200KW+ charging on the motorway, and that’s not simple to provide.
Poss combination of bubble but also moving expectations? I feel pretty consistently amazed by the new things that they can do reliably..
Yeah, absolutely. If it all goes wrong then 90% of that investment certainly gone if not more...
Sure, but low maturity doesn't prevent it being capital intensive 😅 See also building rockets/new aircraft, fusion reactors, battery factories, etc etc
More seriously, this is just a capital intensive business. If I ask for a $1B investment to set up a new oil cracking facility, it's the same, albeit H100s will depreciate slightly faster. Or, topically, buying a blast furnace.
