Didn't he shoot himself with a gun given to him as a gift? By a certain Fidel Castro? Who was something of a totalitarian dictator?
I mean, the leader of a democratic country having a totalitarian dictator as a dear fried doesn't prove he was plotting to destroy democracy, but it's kinda suggestive. And almost inevitably, by the time you get real proof, it's going to be too late to do anything about it.
Your last question hints at another question we also need to explore: do or will humans apply the same level of scrutiny to automatic outputs than they do to human ones? I find we tend to treat them as more authoritative. Are we more likely to unthinkingly accept mistakes by a machine?
As a brief aside, I wonder if we'll see increasing rates of accidents as the rate of AI drivers rises. I think it's hard to think about those effects in a vacuum - they have fewer injury accidents _now_, but will they if they go from making up a trivial percent of traffic to 10%? 25%?
When I was new, I saw one of my more experienced colleagues ask a few questions that together saved the company more than $1 mil each year. ChatGPT might be a threat to automate some low-level tasks or help eliminate bugs, but it is nowhere near ready to evaluate the context of a system, understand its history, or think* through the consequences of a major business decision.
Though if it comes an AI with the capacity to include more context (ie: all company financials, communications, market analysis, etc...) it might be even more effective than a human with precise context.
Communication might be strictly email in the future. Or something that could be pipelined into the "AI" for context. Video/Calls might make it too at some point. Face to Face meetings strictly prohibited.
I agree with you to a point, but I think the only reason that it can't understand the context of a system is because it hasn't been trained on that system's code and documentation, which is obviously a future coming soon.
I'm not sure training these models on code and documentation will make that much of a difference. These models struggle significantly with subtlety, relevance, and correctness. It also doesn't have a theory of its own knowledge or confidence, and so tends to "hallucinate" and put out confidently-worded nonsense. Especially for complex and nuanced topics.
A big part of my job in software is having a very sharpened grasp of my ignorance, the ability to weigh a variety of tradeoffs, and the ability to convey my confidence of my abilities and my team's abilities. I'm not sure this is possible for this generation of AI.
The hallucination part is due to a lack of constraints. The AI can recognize constraints, but it can't recognize what it doesn't know for lack of context.
Prohibit all physical meetings. Force all communication through mediums that can be pipelined. Feed everything (accounting, contracts, law, etc...). Work will be then to architecture the AI to produce the optimal response.
The first company to figure this out will be too ahead. I don't think anything will be anywhere close to compete including nation states.
This kind of thing is technically illegal, but happens all the time. We should definitely expect to see lots of tactics that are technically illegal as companies fight back against this unionization push. But it does mean giving up direct control of their warehouse operations, which strikes me as unlikely, at least with only one shop having unionized so far.
That's the fun/smart/evil thing about how Kroger did this...Zenith was regional. Only 2 or 3 state area, KY/IN/OH if I remember right. And Kroger due to its sheer size became their only customer. Or perhaps the company didn't even exist prior, it's hard to actually research. So of course, in reality, Kroger still has direct control.
They can do this in every region, of course, to keep any company from getting too big for its britches.
This is part of what Europe has Transfer of Undertakings laws for. Transfer of Undertakings laws basically say if an employee was working for X, and then supposedly they're now working for Y, but actually it's the same fucking job, then since those employees are doing the same job that's the same contract, any rules about that contract still apply.
Under Transfer rules, Unions transfer too, unless the "same fucking job" is actually integrated somehow as might happen after a merger, so that the group of employees being represented by the union are just some fraction of an otherwise indistinguishable workforce. So the warehouse situation wouldn't trigger that, but e.g. if Walmart bought Kroger, closed all the Kroger stores, but kept 10% of the workers, moving them to a nearby Walmart as employees of that store, those employees lose their distinct nature and any Kroger union doesn't come with them.
I'm a nonexpert and don't have time to develop expertise, even lay expertise, in this field. What I want to see before I get excited about fusion iss a practical application of the technology. I'd like to see it power something real: a factory, a server farm, or some other energy intensive facility.
Hopefully this is an important first step, but this seems like an extraordinarily hard problem. Often, scaling these technologies is the most challenging part of implementing them.
it's not about powering something powerful, I'm not sure if you're actually a "kid" like your username suggests, but when generating energy we're looking about the input and output of Watts or Megawatts. So how much energy do I have to put in to get to which output. What you do with that energy doesn't matter, it can be a server farm, it can be your grandmas kettle
Maybe Dang can use ChatGPT to pre-generate some standard low-information replies on every post? It could save a lot of time. I volunteer to help train it to do the "I can build this in two weeks" and "why does company X need so many people" replies.
I don't want to be 'that guy' buuuutttt can you turn down the hostility a few notches please?
I understand that HN is a multicultural place and that people across the globe express their opinions in different ways however, a quick look through your previous comments before deciding to down-vote or flag made me take a look at your previous comment history before deciding whether to down-vote or flag it.
We are all new to HN at some stage which is why I've taken the time to write this in an attempt to be kind, gentle and guiding.
There are likely other charges that they could face. I don't think this rises to the level of embezzlement (although IANAL), but the missing customer deposits, lack of strict segregation between Alameda and FTX, and the use of company assets for personal loans and purchases will probably lead to indictments.
It goes much deeper. They clearly stole a lot of customer money and SBF is supposed to have had a "backdoor" he could use to move funds between the exchange and Alameda to avoid detection by auditors. It doesn't get much more criminal than that in finance.
I don't know if it will happen, but a potentially good outcome here would be some regulation on the business practices of sufficiently large private companies in order to ensure they meet some basic level of corporate governance. Maybe they don't need the same level of scrutiny publicly traded companies have, but establishing minimum standards of conduct would help avert crises like this that can spread across entire sectors.
In Europe there are rules that work out to: if you have 50 employees or assets over EUR ~5 million, you must disclose audited financial statements publicly (this is not strictly true, but it is true to a first order approximation).
It wouldn't be crazy sounding to require that companies worth over $10 billion USD disclose financial statements audited by reputable firms.
Not investing into companies that are obviously either frauds or extremely incompetent is the investor's job. We don't need a lot of new regulation to make it harder for you to buy bridges from people you meet on the subway.
The idea behind the lack of regulation is that the impact is contained to the investors. It's obvious that in sufficiently large cases, that's not true. If these actors are able to do damage to entire sectors, they should have to do some minimum stuff: keep track of their money, have board meetings, submit to audits, etc.
And they will ... it's just that they'll provide false numbers to audits, their board will be them and their friends, and they'll keep track of their money as it makes its way into their pockets.
I guess we need more blockchain! But what business will have 100% of their relationships, contracts and transactions publicly visible?
Have you worked with a reputable outside auditor? You don't just provide numbers and illustrate your methodology for obtaining them, you have to essentially reconstruct your entire revenue and finance system with them, provide ongoing random samplings, demonstrate the consistency of any calculations, and many, many other steps that I don't have time to illustrate. Companies couldn't just provide a false number, they'd have to construct a parallel revenue and finance system with false data. Do some companies still cheat and get away with it even after audits? Of course. But it's a major deterrent to this kind of behavior and a reputable auditor would have caught many of FTX's illegal activities much earlier.
That depends on how much effort it is to fool the auditors. Will it cost you 5bn a year or 5mn? It worked for Wirecard, and as far as I understand, it wasn't super sophisticated either.
Do you believe they'll have trouble building a case against SBF & friends?
I took the comments to mean they wanted something to stop this from occurring, and I don't think that works well, criminals are going to do what criminals do. You can prosecute afterwards, but you can't easily stop them before they do it, see Theranos, WireCard, Nikola etc etc.
If you aren't born rich, breaking out of the working class, even the top tier of it, requires significant effort and enormous luck. It's usually time and effort wasted in pursuit of something no one should want. However, if you dream of sitting atop the pyramid but you weren't born there, you better get on that grind.
Before I had kids, whenever I was tired at work, someone would say "you think that's bad? Wait til you have kids." I would roll my eyes and assume it was either hyperbole or that it was a mildly more intense version of what I felt. Of course, you know that I was wrong, and after 96 hours with a newborn I knew I was wrong too.
I compare the exhaustion you feel from parenting tothe effects of psychedelic drugs. It's pervasive, life altering, and impossible to explain to someone who hasn't experienced it.
Well, I am reminded on this forum very often that any poor software product is most likely because developers are not compensated fairly for their work.
