Unlikely, given that large swathes of talent have already left xAI, ostensibly due to poor leadership management. Simply throwing money in to build the biggest datacenters in the world doesn't do much good without bright minds to back it up.
https://www.fastcompany.com/91531084/inside-the-xai-exodus
Be careful taking the headlines at face value - that list of people leaving was mostly product and redundant senior execs to my eyes, post spacex merger. You’d expect those folks to be asked to leave as part of a re-org in any event. I don’t think it’s dispositive one way or the other on the tech org.
They were world-class senior developers and AI engineers most renowned in the AI research communities
(e.g. Jimmy Ba the legend, Christian Szegedy, Igor Babuschkin, Greg Yang),
poached from other companies to join xAI and they were getting very high salaries.
The mass exodus has been happening way before spacex merger though.
Post model 3 launch, Tesla had a number of senior folks leave almost immediately. My read at that time was they had hit or exceeded pareto-optimal on the suffering:wealth scale —- Tesla was clearly going to make it, and they had already vested 90% of the value they’d receive from Tesla ownership: why go suffer through the massive build out?
And in fact, in that era, Tesla did bring in a bunch of auto industry types to help scale, who as it happens also certainly did very well, but order of magnitude less well than the early peeps.
There might be some similar economics here: change of control will often fully vest early founders. Combined with incoming SX IPO, these guys are done financially — as in, already multibillionaires pre-IPO. You’d have to want to stay and the company would have to really want you to stay as well before it made economic sense to re-up.
People say a lot of things about working for Elon; things like “hardest work I ever did,” and “he made me extremely rich”, but you don’t read “that was easy” very often.
I have no idea if there’s enough talent right now at xAI to go build a foundation model, but in the immortal worlds of Carl Icahn: “don’t bet against Elon”
Oh god, thanks for the heads up. It's a wonder how many people fell for it, definitely non-zero I reckon. I would hate for this to become a thing on LinkedIn.
Yes, that's only if AI would ask you to validate all prior assumptions to avoid being led by a false premise. I don't see AI or humans bothering to do that.
So this was why the FBI Director Kash Patel was in a panic when he couldn't log in one day. Revoking credentials before firing someone makes a lot of sense in security.
no, becaus the simple and pragmatic solution for ANYONE who is subject to arbitrary termination, is to litter everything they build with caltrops and dead man triggers
and then hint that they will go into "consulting" when fired.
I know of one case where this was totaly unintentional, and a machinest at a local pulp and paper plant had self delegated to
write the software that controlled tension
on the giant machines in the mill, but as it was his only real forey into sofware, nobody else could operate it, and they fired him after a manegment reshuffle, and then after the next scheduled shut down, nothing worked right, greasy dusty ancient screen with a blinking cursor was what they had, plugged into the important bits of a half sqare mile plant.
still funny to think about!
Or if you don't want to booby trap your code, buy one of those tiny devices that make a cricket noise randomly every 5-15 minutes, and hide it somewhere in the restroom.
These are too obvious - 5-15 minutes gives your victim way too many opportunities to narrow down the location.
What you really need is one that chirps once every (multiple of) 20-28 hours (with weighting towards 23-25 to keep it roughly around the time you set it going and an infrequent skipping of a day.) Also with different volumes and, ideally, different chirps. Occasionally a double chirp just for extra insanity causing.
(A Michael Jackson "hee heee" would be another good option.)
I think they already have a usage disclaimer on the use of ChatGPT. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it already stated one cannot use their services for:
"provision of tailored advice that requires a license, such as legal or medical advice, without appropriate involvement by a licensed professional." — How else could this be interpreted/twisted in court?
https://openai.com/policies/usage-policies/
Placebo effect may exist for someone who claims to sleep better with it, but there are effects that are definitely not placebo.
In the water that I drink in the morning I dissolve small quantities of powders of magnesium bisglycinate and potassium citrate.
Before starting to do this, after days with more intense physical effort, I frequently had nocturnal leg cramps. Since I began taking this regularly, I never had leg cramps again.
Understandable thing to test for but, in my experience magnesium has been legitimate for me. I've found it improved my ability to think personally and depression. The 'dosing effects' are the thing that convinced me it is a real effect. If I ran out of it and was say, waiting for it coming in the mail I could go for it for some days without noticing a difference. That level of 'some endurance, don't need it daily' seemed to suggest some real pharmacology behidn it.
I also say for me because if you already have good levels of magnesium in your diet, it will have nothing to improve.
gwern once ran a rigorous N=1 self-experiment on magnesium with self-blinding and week-long blocks, and concluded that it was probably helpful to him: https://gwern.net/nootropic/magnesium#conclusion
You are welcome to review his methodology and see if it still seems like the placebo effect.
Based on his ranking of MP (mood/productivity), he concluded that it helped for the first three weeks and then got worse because he was overdosing on the magnesium. So not much there is going to apply to the general case.
Now if only one side did not insist that their snake oil sales(wo)men were the good snake oil sales(wo)men, whereas the other sides' are the fraudulent con artist ones.
reply