Jump to content

AIkonoklazt

Senior Members
  • Posts

    411
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by AIkonoklazt

  1. AFAIK nobody has done the math on the ecological disaster that $7T would bring about, but there is some noise being made about it starting with Hugging Face's climate lead: https://venturebeat.com/ai/sam-altman-wants-up-to-7-trillion-for-ai-chips-the-natural-resources-required-would-be-mind-boggling/
  2. Because TSMC has 12 fabs that are processor fabs, Samsung about 5, and Intel has 17. That's what... 34. Let's round that up to 50 or something. Still not even a tenth. Look inside your own computer. What processors are there? If you have an AMD rig, everything's TSMC. Nvidia cards are either TSMC or Samsung. Intel stuff are Intel and some TSMC. Same with anything that goes on server racks. 10x the capacity of the entire world just for AI workload. Uh, no...... There are reasons why not, first I'd like to mention that existing infrastructure already handle AI, that's the Amazon guys with the servers they rent out, but OpenAI is probably going go with Microsoft's own Azure infrastructure first (.......and all the Bing/"MS Copilot" stuff already runs there......) No. Not incredulity. It's just how much it's not gonna take.
  3. I'm arguing from evidence. Each fab is $20B. Samsung itself is about $300B. "Someone is trying to commit fraud, but that's okay because people will see through it" doesn't make a defense, sorry. I'm not following yours. Which part of this following quote of his from the article don't you understand? Specifically, which part of it implies scaling up projects to the tune of trillions of dollars?
  4. https://www.wired.com/story/openai-ceo-sam-altman-the-age-of-giant-ai-models-is-already-over/ $7T points to not "giant" but "beyond gargantuan" Hey what the heck I was gonna link the following smoking-gun tweet that someone forwarded to me in HIS SUPPORT of Altman and Altman DELETED IT! Why?? That's not nice at all!!
  5. (I saw TheVat quoting you, forgot I still have you on block, unblocked) I don't think anyone who is outside of the industry, either in north/south/east/west, would or perhaps even could comprehend the scale. A colleague joked to me about fusion power, and I kinda doubt if that's enough even if it outputs 10x. Just that monster data-center network used to model-condition (hate using the word "train" in reference to machines) and respond with uh... $7T worth or even $1T worth of hardware is on the level of entire usage swaths of medium-sized COUNTRIES, not just cities as in the case of power-gobbling crypo-mining farms. I'm going to respond with the same sort of line I used in the first thread. Let me put it this way. Someone ask you for $7000 dollars for something that could be done for much less than $500, on top of the fact that he already acknowledged elsewhere to someone else that spending money on that particular thing would be useless. Are you still not going to call this a grift? It doesn't jive with his very own rhetoric. He himself already said scaling up isn't going to help. Let's put aside any of his rhetoric for a moment; The sheer scale is already off the chart. Nothing, literally nothing, takes nearly that much. NASA Space Shuttle program from start to finish: $209 billion (2010 dollars) including 134 flights https://www.space.com/12166-space-shuttle-program-cost-promises-209-billion.html ......that's start to finish. Not just start. If you're talking "moon shot," well that's still not it. The entire Apollo 1960-1973 program was $257 billion (2020 dollars) https://www.planetary.org/space-policy/cost-of-apollo No.......... you're not waving this one off
  6. Thanks, +1 for confirming. Still didn't like what you said in the other thread when I gave it a neg
  7. Let's be generous and discount his tweet, and that he's going to make his own manly fabs (ref what ex-AMD CEO Sanders said a long while back) That's still 20X Samsung How is that part "hyperbole"
  8. First part here: Now for the second part, since it's allegedly "non-interesting." I do find it "interesting" how Sam is going to a foundry now, complete with a Government wig who's tagging along: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/events/ifs-direct-connect.html Now think about this for half a minute. He's not even building anything ground up- There's been zero indications of that. Every indication he's given so far points to "ready made" sources (see above post), either buying hardware outright (the GPU kits he tweeted about) or going to a foundry to procure silicon. It would be doubly puzzling/"interesting" why that he's asking $7 TRILLION for this endeavor. Since NOT going ground-up costs SIGNIFICANTLY less than supplying yourself from your own fabs AND your own process tech R&D (such reasons is why Samsung, Intel, and IBM are basically the ONLY semiconductor verticals left in the whole world after AMD jettisoned theirs a while back) Question remains that what in the world is the Samster gonna do with even ONE trillion (#1 Samsung is only about a third of that trillion...) let alone SEVEN trillion. For reference, TSMC is "only" spending 40 Billion in Arizona, and that's spread across TWO FABS, a project that's already huge in every way (21k construction jobs, world's biggest cranes that couldn't fit on a 2-lane, etc.): https://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/2022/12/07/what-to-know-phoenix-taiwan-semiconductor-factory/69707994007/ Like the neurons vs transistors comparisons I've done before, I'm going to be extremely generous in this comparison: Ignore that Samsung has its own fabs already i.e. just ignore all those manufacturing plants, okay? Ignore the fact that Samsung does/make a whole load of other silicon stuff than just processors Ignore everything Samsung has built up over the decades, outside of investor valuation Instead of adding anything to OpenAI, just do separate new stuff, no creating verticals or anything despite any advantages of it and waste/opportunity costs of not going it Open AI / Samster going to create a whole new R&D company that's about 20X times the size of Samsung (despite what he said about the uselessness of scaling up LLMs.............. guess he just did a huge 180 and double/triple/quadrippledown on the opposite.........) and farm out the results of that design to existing foundries. Some design........... Why doesn't he work on a quantum computer instead? Why doesn't he invest exotic materials research (current foundries are more interested in refining processes. Sure they work with universities and all but that's hardly the same thing as pouring the entire company's process research resources into it!)?? Massively, massively, FRAUDULENT, "developmental posture." The Samster said he's focused on raising funds from UAE (United Arab Emerates.....) so he's counting on the desert oil barons and UAE royal family members there to fall for his money-draining scheme? ============================== Let's give him the benefit of a sliver of doubt that he's actually going to build this "20X Samsung Uber Designhouse" that's going to eventually pump out silicon from the likes of Intel. What actual good is this going to do, in general? Gary Marcus wrote an open letter to Sam Altman regarding this question. https://garymarcus.substack.com/p/an-open-letter-to-sam-altman Uh, I'd say that Altman care for exactly none of those things. He's trying to raise trillions and pay himself billions.
  9. Since you commented regarding some neg rep in another thread and I couldn't answer there, I'll answer it here. Unless none of those "emotive responses" (neg reps) in that thread were yours, I was simply returning the favor on a comment I didn't like. You didn't like something, and I didn't either. ...That's what these things are for, because that's how I've seen them used all along. "No sir I don't like it." -Mister Horse Got lots of those in the artificial consciousness thread when people couldn't give any support to their counter-opinions and "no sir I don't like it" is the only thing they could do (it must have broken the record for most negs in a single thread on this board or something) Think I'll post a screenshot when the red number hits triple digits. I'll note this in my signature for the popcorn enjoyers.
  10. Then I'm really curious as to what the poll questions actually are, as in do they just straight up ask "who are you going to vote for in the 2024 presidential election" instead of some weird stuff that gives people non-committal wiggling room. If it's a straightforward "Biden or Trump for 2024?" then anyone from never-Trumpers to hardcore Biden campers would obviously answer "Biden."
  11. The keyword isn't "Elon" or "Musk" but "technology"
  12. YT transcript: ...and that's exactly what happened- Russia taking over Eastern Ukraine to create a land bridge to Crimea. I think he's also right about the reason for the eventual invasion: The weakness shown by US towards Putin. My punctuated requote: The "NATO encroachment provocation" narrative of the spark of the Russian-Ukrainian war is incorrect. What provoked Putin wasn't the intimidating strength being shown by NATO but weakness shown by the United States. Putin knew that the US wasn't willing to shore up Ukraine, especially after the nothingburger it was served after the Crimea invasion. If Trump wins the election, Ukraine is fucked. Trump will withdraw aid, and Ukraine won't have a chance thereafter. After Russia overruns Ukraine, Moldova is next. The situation in and around Transnistria sounds similar to the one that existed in Crimea prior to Russian invasion and annexation:
  13. Just remember that if you've got these deadly "automatically driven" road missiles hitting you and maybe killing and maiming you, no one would take responsibility: Drivers blame car because it's "driving itself": https://www.audacy.com/kmox/news/local/missouri-highway-patrol-see-more-self-driving-cars-accidents Car makers blame the drivers: https://safeautonomy.blogspot.com/2023/09/no-mercedes-benz-will-not-take-blame.html Koopman points out that the deflection of responsibility by all parties is secondary to people getting hurt/killed: Tesla driver does not remember killing anyone: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/tesla-driver-believes-his-car-would-ve-been-using-self-driving-feature-if-he-hit-and-killed-mille-lacs-doctor/ar-BB1i3xGz
  14. I don't think of them as black boxes at all. I think the "black box" designation is a myth. Again I'd point to Wolfram's explanation of neural nets and their role in LLMs: https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2023/02/what-is-chatgpt-doing-and-why-does-it-work/ The input data form these attractor regions with the signals that are distributed across the network, and the more data you put in, the better the resultant curves fit to the data (of course). It's just a way of encoding inputs and form them into 3D "landscapes" where later on data points can be compared to see which region it correspond to on that 3D curve. That's how all these things "function"... via correspondence effects. If a signal comes out at the other end correspond to a particular region, it's the result of the form-fitting and not any "meaning" the system is somehow comprehending. This is why these things are always vulnerable to adversarial attacks, because they rely on correspondence. Picture labeled as "panda" + pixels invisible to the naked eye = picture labeled as "gibbon"
  15. I don't know about "GOP" but that asshat is still ahead in the polls (and always ahead when I check, which is why I usually don't check) https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/
  16. Yeah I've never even written about trillions of dollars in any discussion before. Not sure what point you're making if you're just picking on it. Do you know what asking for investors' money mean? Let me put it this way. Someone ask you for $3000 dollars for something that could be done for much less than $300, on top of the fact that he already acknowledged elsewhere to someone else that spending money on that particular thing would be useless. Are you still not going to call this a grift?
  17. Trillions not billions, I did that again. He's not going to build 7 trillion worth of anything. Samsung, the largest vertical of them all, is hundreds of billions and not a trillion, much less 7 of them. Also, his tweet was buying GPU and not even building anything. His asking price is clearly fraudulent
  18. Clear misrepresentation. He already expressed the futility of LLM scale before, yet here he is, asking to scale to the tune of 7 BILLION... Way past any groups of vertical semis are even going for. Futility of scale + orders of magnitude over cost = clear fraud
  19. I already backed up my argumentation, where's yours? How much is a chip plant or a GPU firm, and is it anywhere near $7T? No. Did he contradict himself? Yep. I don't see anything from you except empty rhetoric. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and what the heck do you mean "you don't see any engineering"? Chip fabrication and LLM machine conditioning (I don't call it "training") ARE engineering. Here's somewhat of an indication of Altman going: "I've not idea what I'm actually planning, except I'll scale it way up and contradict what I've previously said":
  20. The Samster just asked for a whopping 7 billion investor handout: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/sam-altman-wants-to-raise-up-to-7-trillion-thats-uh-a-lot-of-dough/ar-BB1i3ay5 C'mon... This is clearly bullshit. I can see the "plan" from a billion miles away: 1. Raise trillions 2. Pay himself billions 3. Fuck all, laughs in people's faces as expensive house of cards folds after the smoke clears 4. Open golden parachute to the tune of tens if not hundreds of millions ON TOP 5. Maybe even just repeat that same shit again somewhere else afterwards- It's not as if he hasn't done all this failing-upwards crap BEFORE This is as transparent as it gets as far as criminality is concerned. You know how much is a network of chip manufacturing plants? Biden's CHIPS Act is "only" 52 billion, and that's spread across multiple companies. Guess he wants to start up an entirely new multi-trillion dollar semiconductor manufacturing corporation which dwarfs market behemoth Samsung at a "measly" $370 Billion......... https://companiesmarketcap.com/samsung/marketcap/ ...and what's more, this is AFTER he already said that scaling out LLMs don't work! https://www.wired.com/story/openai-ceo-sam-altman-the-age-of-giant-ai-models-is-already-over/ He just contradicted himself. Now, I'm wondering which oil prince in the UAE is gonna fall for that, and what happens once they find out this is a scam.
  21. I don't know when was the first time it was pointed out, but you do have the answer. 8-ball is equivalent of the "demonstration" being asked.
  22. First I want to say that I couldn't take the hawlings of those AI apocalypse crowd too seriously let I burst a cranial vein (I'll explain the above pic in a moment. It's either going to be Ripley or Babylon 5, but I don't think B5 has a direct quote about what's going on the screen). Here's the copy-pasta reply I do whenever I encounter one of those "posts" on LI: Second, who in the world are these so-called "researchers"??? They "don't know why" it behaved the way it did? Did the article misstate things here? Oh come on! It's not "biases" but the training corpus as a whole! They're staring at that fact and it's right in their faces! It's RIGHT HERE (bolded by me): IT MIGHT AS WELL ALSO OUTPUT "NUKE IT FROM ORBIT, IT'S THE ONLY WAY TO BE SURE" FROM RIPLEY'S LINE IN ALIENS SINCE THAT'S CERTAINLY PART OF THE FICTIONAL CORPUS STORED ON THE INTERNET TOO /screamholler Are they pretending to just "not know," or these "researchers" have no ****ING IDEA how these things work!? Seriously, that's worse than putting ChatGPT to work on medical cases, since even medical fictional works have more of these technical jargon-laden sequences than, say, generic military scenarios that could be anything from Reddit posts or cross-universe Harry Potter fanfics. Of course, that doesn't make it any better even in those cases: https://inflecthealth.medium.com/im-an-er-doctor-here-s-what-i-found-when-i-asked-chatgpt-to-diagnose-my-patients-7829c375a9da Before I take a big breath, I'm going to question if those "researchers" are researchers at all.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.