Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | thethimble's commentslogin

Why is this relevant at all?

Having humans in the loop at some level is necessary for handling rare edge cases safely.


The word "loop" here has multiple meanings. Only one is what you mean and the other person responding to you has understood another.

The first is the DDT control loop, what a human driver does. Waymo's remote assistants aren't involved in that. The computer always has responsibility for the safety of the vehicle and decisionmaking while operating, which is why Waymo's humans are remote assistants and not remote drivers. Their safety drivers do participate in the DDT loop, hence the name.

But there's also another "loop" of human involvement. Sometimes the vehicle doesn't understand the scene and asks humans for advice about the appropriate action to take. It's vaguely similar to captchas. The human will usually confirm the computer's proposed actions, but they can also suggest different actions. The computer the advice as a prior to continue operating instead of giving up the DDT responsibility. There's very likely a closely monitored SLA between a few seconds to a few minutes on how long it takes humans to start looking at the scene.

If something causes the computer to believe the advice isn't safe, it will ignore it. There have been cases where Waymos have erroneously detected collisions and remote assistants were unable to override that decisionmaking. When that happens, a vehicle recovery team is physically sent out to the location. The SLA here is likely between tens of minutes and a couple hours.


If that’s true the system isn’t finished. That’s what reasoning is for.

Who ever said they were finished? You think the laid off the team since everything is “done”?

The AI market is an infinite sum market.

Consider the fact that 7 year old TPUs are still sitting at near 100p utilization today.


Speak for yourself. I've been insanely productive with Codex 5.2.

With the right scaffolding these models are able to perform serious work at high quality levels.


He wasn't saying that both of the models suck, but that the heuristics for measuring model capability suck

..huh?

The consumers are getting huge wins.

Model costs continue to collapse while capability improves.

Competition is fantastic.


> The consumers are getting huge wins.

However, the investors currently subsidizing those wins to below cost may be getting huge losses.


Yes, but that's the nature of the game, and they know it.

> Model costs continue to collapse

And yet RAM prices are still sky high. Game consoles are getting more expensive, not cheaper, as a result. When will competition benefit those consumers? Or consumers of desktop RAM?


The free market has simply decided these consumers are not as relevant as the others.

Maybe the free market is wrong.

It can’t be. Those uses are suboptimal, hence the users aren’t willing to pay the new prices.

Not really. Investors with hundreds of billions of dollars have decided it. The process by which capital has been allocated the way it has isn't some mathematically natural or optimal thing. Our market is far from free.

Saying "investors with hundreds of billions decided it" makes it sound like a few people just chose the outcome, when in reality prices and capital move because millions of consumers, companies, workers, and smaller investors keep making choices every day. Big investors only make money if their decisions match what people actually want; they can't just command success. If they guess wrong, others profit by allocating money better, so having influence isn't the same as having control.

The system isn't mathematically perfect, but that doesn't make it arbitrary. It works through an evolutionary process: bad bets lose money, better ones gain more resources.

Any claim that the outcome is suboptimal only really means something if the claimant can point to a specific alternative that would reliably do better under the same conditions. Otherwise critics are mostly just expressing personal frustration with the outcome.


As long as China continues to blitz forward, regulation is a direct path to losing.

Define "losing."

Europe is prematurely regarded as having lost the AI race. And yet a large portion of Europe live higher quality lives compared to their American counterparts, live longer, and don't have to worry about an elected orange unleashing brutality on them.


If the world is built on AI infrastructure (models, compute, etc.) that is controlled by the CCP then the west has effectively lost.

This may lead to better life outcomes, but if the west doesn't control the whole stack then they have lost their sovereignty.

This is already playing out today as Europe is dependent on the US for critical tech infrastructure (cloud, mail, messaging, social media, AI, etc). There's no home grown European alternatives because Europe has failed to create an economic environment to assure its technical sovereignty.


Europe has already lost the tech race - their cloud systems that their entire welfare states rely upon are all hosted on servers hosted by American private companies, which can turn them off with a flick of a switch if and when needed.

When the welfare state, enabled by technology, falls apart, it won't take long for European society to fall apart. Except France maybe.


welfare state enabled by cloud services/technology?

I'm not sure if you know less about europe or tech.

> Except France maybe.

sure


You mean all paths are direct paths to losing.

This will absolutely help but to the extent that prompt injection remains an unsolved problem, an LLM can never conclusively determine whether a given skill is truly safe.

> And not delivering products

2024 revenue of >$100b is quite impressive for not delivering any products


You know what they mean. Full self-driving was promised what, 10 years ago? Tesla Roadster? Sub-25K car? etc etc etc

I should say delivering promised products.

Anyway they just canned the S and X lines so that's done as well...


What kind of nonsense is that. SpaceX 2024 revenue barely broke $10B, if that. Launch was probably ~$4B and Starlink probably ~$5B. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and double those just for shits and giggles and that's still less than $20B and you're claiming >$100B? Horse shit. Nonsense.

Tesla

Perhaps there should be an EU committee to draft a mandate for a working group tasked with identifying the necessary stakeholders for a preliminary report on digital infrastructure.

Perhaps instead there should be a president enriching himself and insulting citizens executed by his goons.

Clawdbot is one of those things that's really hard to get unless you have experienced it.

It's got four things that make it great:

1. Discord/Slack/WA/etc integration so those apps become your frontend

2. Filesystem for long term memory and state

3. Easy extensibility with skills

4. Cron for recurring jobs

Sure, many of these things exist in other systems but none in a cohesive package that makes it fun and easy.


I would argue that issuing commands to an LLM that has access to your digital life and filesystem through a SaaS messaging service is stupid to an unimaginable degree.

To each their own!

The Discord/Slack frontend reduces friction significantly - particularly on mobile.

With proper sandboxing you get real benefits while limiting the blast radius significantly.


If it's properly sandboxed then I fail to see how it's useful, unless you're attaching it to your e-mail, calendar, etc. If you're attaching it to those things, then I still don't see how the SaaS messenger account you're using being hacked doesn't still directly imperil your personal information.

Like, I could run this thing on an isolated VLAN in a VM, but if I hook it up to a SaaS app for its frontend, then it's immediately insecure if the bot is connected to anything of value. If it's not connected to anything of value, then what's the point?


I had already tried. Feels like lots of hype.

Or even zellij > tmux


I wanted to believe, but wasn’t able to get most of my config working the same in zellij since it has fewer configuration knobs. Tried writing a plugin, but even those can’t touch much of the internal state. Particularly the keybinds I remember not being able to replicate (smart resizing, respecting vim, context sensitivity):

https://github.com/foltik/dots/blob/main/config/tmux.conf


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: