Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Loop Puncher Gets Some Medicine Someone caught the “loop puncher” downtown and gave him a taste of his own medicine. last night. Shoutout bmoneybmoney_ for chasing him off 🫡 The “Loop Puncher” is believed to be a man accused of randomly punching pedestrians, often women, in downtown Chicago (particularly...

64,751 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce •via X (Twitter)

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

Demis Hassabis confirmed every frontier AI lab is working on recursive self-improvement and in the same sentence said the safety risk of removing humans from the loop entirely keeps him up at night. That combination should stop you. The CEO of Google DeepMind just confirmed that the thing most people treat as a theoretical future risk is already the active focus of every serious lab on earth right now. He explained why it works in coding and math. The feedback loop is fast. You can verify whether an answer is correct almost instantly. You can generate synthetic training data from it. The loop closes quickly and cleanly. Then he said where it breaks down. In biology, chemistry and physics. Any domain where verifying a hypothesis requires a physical experiment in the real world. The loop does not close in seconds. It closes in weeks or months. Geoffrey Hinton said in his Nobel lecture that recursive self-improvement is the development he fears most and that once started it may not be possible to stop. Hassabis is not pushing back on that. He is describing the guardrails labs are building around a process they are already running. Every lab has to think carefully about the safety of a process where no human is in the loop. He said that as a constraint they are navigating right now. The question they are sitting with is how much of it to let run without a human watching. (Watch the full interview on YouTube at Two Minute Papers channel)

Ihtesham Ali

68,231 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

This story differentiates a time loop and a cycle even though at the end of the day, it’s similar concepts. She is right in saying it’s not a time loop because here in the story a time loop is what Paradox Junction was. In a time loop, characters can remember what’s happening and try to break the loop which again is what they did in Paradox Junction. But this is clearly a cycle. The explanation after that specific quote where she says it’s not a time loop showcases how the cycle is already play because certain starting conditions were met which I assume is Requiem dying and Ravenov protecting Ava until she gets pulled into the DA. What they’re doing is preserving the “NOW” in order for everyone else to move on. If something like the Requiem crew getting pulled into the Dark Aether doesn’t happen, even though the characters win in a prior cycle in Rex Infernus, reality dies by the Warden. That “NOW” is what Requiem is dying for. They also talk about how free choice is king and Caltheris brings up how even small changes can have vast effects. We can connect this to the Reckoning endings. The characters have free choice to help either Richtofen or SAM but they’ll still end up being pulled into the DA. So those endings are still canon until a future plot thread says otherwise. And I’ll say this again, if there is no cycle, then Requiem doesn’t need to die at all. If Requiem dying is protecting the “NOW”, a cycle is in play because if they never end up in the basement after Rex Infernus or really any point during this cycle, Warden wins.

ItzPerka

22,270 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Peter Steinberger, creator of OpenClaw, on why AI agents still produce "slop" without human taste in the loop: "You can create code and run all night and then you have like the ultimate slop because what those agents don't really do yet is have taste." Peter is direct: raw capability without direction still produces mediocre output. "They are spiky smart and they're really good at things, but if you don't navigate them well, if you don't have a vision of what you're going to build, it's still going to be slop. If you don't ask the right questions, it's still going to be slop." Great AI-assisted work is defined by the human guiding it. Peter Steinberger 🦞 describes his own creative process when starting a new project: "When I start a project, I have like this very rough idea what it could be. And as I play with it and feel it, my vision gets more clear. I try out things, some things don't work, and I evolve my idea into what it will become." Most people skip this part entirely, front-loading everything into a single prompt and wondering why the result feels hollow. "My next prompt depends on what I see and feel and think about the current state of the project." Each step informs the next. The work itself is the feedback loop. "But if you try to put everything into a spec up front, you miss this kind of human-machine loop. And then I don't know how something good can come out without having feelings in the loop — almost like taste." The agentic trap is what happens when you remove yourself from the process too early.

Big Brain AI

489,134 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce