You don’t ask people to speak how you want, you simply only invite people who already have a history of speaking how you want. This phenomena is explained in detail I. Noam Chomsky’s work around mass media (eg NY Times doesn’t tell their editors what to do exactly, but only hire editors who already want to say what NY Times wants, or have a certain world view). The same can be applied to social media reviews. Invite the person who gives glowing reviews all the time.
Do you know where Noam makes that argument? I've been trying to figure out where I picked it up years ago. I'd like to revisit it to deepen my understanding. It's a pretty universal insight.
"I don't say you're self-censoring - I'm sure you believe everything you're saying; but what I'm saying is, if you believed something different, you wouldn't be sitting where you're sitting." -- Noam Chomksy to Andrew Marr
It's a shame the interviewer didn't quite grasp that point and dig a little deeper into it. Listening to it again I'm reminded of "The masters tools will never dismantle the master's house".
Though this is often associated with his and Herman's "Propaganda Model," Chomsky has also commented that the same appears in scholarly literature, despite the overt propaganda forces of ownership and advertisement being absent:
> What I don't think this technology will do is replace game engines. I just don't see how you could get the very precise and predictable editing you have in a regular game engine from anything like the current model. The real advantage of game engines is how they allow teams of game developers to work together, making small and localized changes to a game project.
I've been thinking about this a while and it's obvious to me:
Put Minecraft (or something similar) under the hood. You just need data structures to encode the world. To enable mutation, location, and persistence.
If the model is given additional parameters such as a "world mesh", then it can easily persist where things are, what color or texture they should be, etc.
That data structure or server can be running independently on CPU-bound processes. Genie or whatever "world model" you have is just your renderer.
It probably won't happen like this due to monopolistic forces, but a nice future might be a future where you could hot swap renderers between providers yet still be playing the same game as your friends - just with different looks and feels. Experiencing the world differently all at the same time. (It'll probably be winner take all, sadly, or several independent vertical silos.)
If I were Tim Sweeny at Epic Games, I'd immediately drop all work on Unreal Engine and start looking into this tech. Because this is going to shore them up on both the gaming and film fronts.
As a renderer, given a POV, lighting conditions, and world mesh might be a very, very good system. Sort of a tight MCP connection to the world-state.
I think in this context, it could be amazing for game creation.
I’d imagine you would provide item descriptions to vibe-code objects and behavior scripts, set up some initial world state(maps), populated with objects made of objects - hierarchically vibe-modeled, make a few renderings to give inspirational world-feel and textures, and vibe-tune the world until you had the look and feel you want. Then once the textures and models and world were finalised, it would be used as the rendering context.
I think this is a place that there is enough feedback loops and supervision that with decent tools along these lines, you could 100x the efficiency of game development.
It would blow up the game industry, but also spawn a million independent one or two person studios producing some really imaginative niche experiences that could be much, much more expansive (like a AAA title) than the typical indie-studio product.
> you could 100x the efficiency of game development.
> It would blow up the game industry, but also spawn a million independent one or two person studios producing some really imaginative niche experiences that could be much, much more expansive (like a AAA title) than the typical indie-studio product.
All video games become Minecraft / Roblox / VRChat. You don't need AAA studios. People can make and share their own games with friends.
Scary realization: YouTube becomes YouGame and Google wins the Internet forever.
I haven’t checked on Roblox recently, but afaik it doesn’t really allow complete creative freedom or the ability to have a picture and say “make the world look like this, and make the character textures match the vibe” and have it happen. Don’t they still have a unified world experience or can you really customize things that deeply now?
Can you make a basically indistinguishable copy of other games in Roblox? If so, that’s pretty cool, even without AI integration.
Roblox can't beat Google in AI. Roblox has network effects with users, but on an old school tech platform where users can't magic things into existence.
I've seen Roblox's creative tools, even their GenAI tools, but they're bolted on. It's the steam powered horse problem.
Don't put the world state into the model. Use the model as a renderer of whatever objects the "engine" throws at it.
Use the CPU and RAM for world state, then pass it off to the model to render.
Regardless of how this is done, Unreal Engine with all of its bells and whistles is toast. That C++ pile of engineering won't outdo something this flexible.
How many watts and how much capital does it take to run this model? How many watts and how much capital does it take to run unity or unreal? I suspect there's a huge discrepancy here, among other things.
Generate a deep technical briefing, not a light podcast overview. Focus on technical accuracy, comprehensive analysis, and extended duration, tailored for an expert listener. The listener has a technical background comparable to a research scientist on an AGI safety team at a leading AI lab. Use precise terminology found in the source materials. Aim for significant length and depth. Aspire to the comprehensiveness and duration of podcasts like 80,000 Hours, running for 2 hours or more.
Do I need to be on a paid version or Pro? I don't see Customize in Audio Overview in the notebook that I just tested.
Edit: I actually see Customize on a notebook where I hadn't already created a podcast. But on a notebook where I had already created one, I can't find a way to Customize. I guess I just need to create a new notebook with the same source material.
Over half of Amazon's third party sellers are Chinese companies who regularly false report to dodge tariffs on their products in ways that American competitors can't. Amazon claims to police them but they're extremely reliant on them at this point and the Chinese sellers just start up new brands if penalized.
The best way to avoid this kind of behavior is to avoid shopping at stores where you can’t trace the origin of their products.
Stop buying “brands”, and looking for “deals” and acting like a consumer. Do research and find high quality products, pay more for those products, buy less disposable junk. This isn’t just a “China” thing it’s in general.
This is actually the exact reason for the existence of brands. You absolutely should buy brands, and stop buying random "RANDOMCAPITALLETTERS Product 1"
But yeah, what people think of as good, high-quality brands often are not.
It's a little difficult for me to make the point I want to make here because I don't disagree with you, but the usage of the word "brand" is not as descriptive as I'd like it to be.
If you're buying good copper cookware the manufacturer "brand" matters, they build a reputation for having quality products, ideally continue to make those quality products at a fair price, etc. and life is good.
But then there are brands and unfortunately when we use the term brand we wind up lumping together "high quality brands" with "cheap, useless dog shit products" and it can be difficult to differentiate. At least for me and my limited vocabulary.
I get it - there are brands that are well-known for being brands (i.e. famous for being famous) and there are brands that are well-known for making legitimately good products.
Avoid the former like the plague, but the latter is one of the best methods to find legitimately great stuff.
Except there is an entire business strategy that has been consistently deployed in extracting that brand value by making the product shittier and just waiting for sales to slow as people figure it out.
I haven't yet - I want to but honestly just haven't had any good ideas on how to do so. I could just create a website and maintain it for other people I guess?
If you have any recommendations or ideas I'd be happy to collaborate! Doesn't need to be something that makes money, though hopefully something that doesn't cost money either! Lol
I find Amazon has the better return policy. HF has at times zero flexibility and I find I really have to pay attention to each item’s policy and weight the risk of failure (eg. A $5 hammer is low risk, $400 machine is too high risk). It’s not worth the mental math required while shopping. I only buy consumables there (HF) now, gloves, ropes, tarps, etc. Nothing with moving part, especially a motor. I’ve been left holding the bag on $400 items I I couldn’t even assemble because the bolt holes were out of alignment (obvious manufacturing defect) and they’ve refused to allow the return or force a boxing fee on me.
I think HF technically tells you no refunds or that there's a restocking fee policy when you buy it so I don't think it would work. As a consumer, I'm used to companies like that making an exception when something goes overly wrong like what happened to me. It's not like I used it and it failed, I couldn't even assemble it. I spoke to the manager and he insisted he didn't even have the authority to wave the fees. It would require some regional VP or greater and I'd have to wait for him to return a message, and he hinted that he never approves it and it would all be a waste of time. I just gave up as I was in the middle of my project and just needed to get back to it. I stopped shopping here after that though.
Can a business just say “no refunds, even if the device is completely non-functional.”
At least (maybe it varies state by state) Massachusetts has an “implied warranty of merchantability,” the thing has to basically work at least for a little bit.
I mean, if the bolt-holes don’t line up, they didn’t just sell you a bad <thing>, they sold you a random sheet of metal that is not <thing>.
This is kind of the argument I made to the manager in a Karenesque fashion. Why would I have even bought it if I knew it was defective? How would I have known without opening the box? Etc. I live in a state that is politically conservative and probably least likely to have similar protections but also ultimately I wasn’t going to have a legal battle over it. They lost me as a customer, well not even entirely, just for tools and bigger ticket stuff. I go through work gloves too quickly and they have them a third of the prices at Home Depot so I go for that
lol. My delivery and general temperament was the karenesque part, I was basically yelling at the guy in the store. I was in the right though so that’s what triggered it.
No, the best way to avoid this kind of behavior is to refrain from incentivizing it with misguided, poorly-thought-out, and anticapitalistic trade policy.
Smuggling is the world's second-oldest profession. Trade finds a way.
When are we going to realize this is a form of dumping by the Chinese? People love cheap goods but as QoL in China improves, they won’t be able to churn out cheap goods for long. That’s why CCP is hellbent on trying to monopolize global supply chain. In fact, I believe we are first slowly and then drastically headed toward global equilibrium in labor cost. We might be looking at significantly cheaper labor in the US and double or triple labor costs in China and India.
The majority of parts of "Swiss Made" watches are made in China, utilizing a loophole that requires 60% of the watch's cost to be manufactured and assembled in Switzerland. So they make a rotor made out of gold in Switzerland, which accounts for 60% of the COGS of the watch, pop the rotor on the movement, and the sapphire glass on the watch, and it's "Swiss Made."
China is already producing top-tier parts at the current set wages. Wages are unlikely to increase as quality of production goes up - it's already world class.
That's the argument as I see it at least. I tend to mostly agree, with some carve-outs for highly specialized industry and general "social" differences in how business is typically done.
At this point, if you need basic manufacturing - China seems unbeatable on both price and quality for the vast majority of items. Not to mention lead times and iteration speed.
That will only last as long as their current generation is not in retirement age (10-20 years left). They have among the worst replacement rates in the world. Its too late to fix that. Afterwards China either becomes fully automated in an extreme fashion or they exit from the world stage as a manufacturing powerhouse. If they become robotic everyone else can as well.
Also on that note Robots are going to have to become real cheap, I suspect the reason they are so good at everything is because there is so much competition from 1+ billion people its that cutthroat
Robots will have to become cheaper than all these people assembling a generic bluetooth speaker or the price will go up eventually tariffs or not...go ahead count the number of people: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFYxSX6xP2U
The fact they are reaching out to journos to read the logs seems really misguided. Like from a customer standpoint that's the worst industry you could reach out to for checking private messages lol
> Like from a customer standpoint that's the worst industry
I guess it depends on the country, but generally journalists are some of the more principled workers when it comes to protecting the privacy of the people they interact with. Probably the industry where Signal has the highest amount of usage, if I would guess.
But again, really depends on the country. My perspective is probably biased by growing up in Sweden.
No they're not. There are whole classes of professional that take on personal liability related to handling of private information. Journalists can be one of them but one reason you do not want a journalist handling private information is that they do not get the benefit of privilege in most jurisdictions. Anything in their possession that is private can be exposed by subpoena or other court order.
Again, depending on the country. I don't think what you're saying applies to my example of Sweden for example. Sweden probably has some of the strongest protections for journalists and their sources in the world, AFAIK.
In Sweden, journalistic source protection ("källskydd") is enshrined in the Swedish Constitution through the Freedom of the Press Act ("Tryckfrihetsförordningen").
Obviously, this doesn't matter much as the submission is about Meta and OpenAI, so journalists aren't as strongly protected as in other places of the world.
I wouldn't say a blanket "journalists are in the worst industry" like parent did, nonetheless.
A journalist that wilfully breaks a legally binding confidentiality agreement, is actually a terrible sign for them.
Media conglomerates will deeply worry about a journo leaking their dirty internal secrets if they morally disagree. Disney, Comcast, Fox, or Bezos don’t want them.
Sources will worry about confidentiality. If a journo confirms something is off the record, it’s off the record. No buts. This is treated very seriously: it ruins the entire publication’s reputation and ability to talk to sources.
If a naive journos tries, it’ll be killed by their editor, if not the editor-in-chief, probably under the veneer of legal and/or ethical grounds.
Of course, a journo can talk to someone else who chooses to disclose whatever, be protected, etc, and that’s how it’s done. But the oldest adage in journalism is: “don’t be the story”.
It’s probably one of the best professions, tbh, as paradoxical as it sounds.
Remember that the journalism industry, as a whole, is not the idealised dream you think it is.
> If a naive journos tries, it’ll be killed by their editor, if not the editor-in-chief, probably under the veneer of legal and/or ethical grounds.
In a lot of situations, the editor needs to know the source so they can evaluate their credibility and to ensure the journo just isn't making stuff up and attributing to anonymous source. At that point, there are many examples of the editor putting stuff into the copy that the journo did not included. Just because something is released under the journo's name does not mean the journo wrote it.
I agree with you.. Though it took me a few read throughs before I understood you liked journalists for this job. I find it interesting that it is so hard to understand people in.
Why are you saying it like it’s a veneer of legal or ethical grounds? Publishing something that was said off the record would be a violation of professional ethics, whether you personally agree with those ethics or not.
I was referring to a journo signing up for say the training program in the article, and then divulging something that’s legally confidential in a story. That would be killed.
I just used “off the record” as an example of why in journalism, respecting agreements is critically important.
Yes. There was just recently a post about a person who got his life saved by chatGPT reading his blood results and saying "ER. NOW." Would that Medical result PDF be anonymized here? Stripping PI from random pdfs, sounds like a very nontrivial problem.
What if, instead of random internet person, some celebrity asks Chatgpt about some spicy Medical results? Would the journalist reviewing the logs resist the temptation of "accidentally finding the test results in a garbage bin"?
What I read here, is "don't discuss with chatgpt anything you wouldn't be comfortable becoming public knowledge.".
I know better than to put sensitive data into these services, but the utility I’ve gained is staggering. My care team told me, “You have to be Dr Google to advocate for yourself,” and well, here I am.
It made predictions based on my history and symptom logs that were later confirmed by imaging only after I pushed for it.
I used a pattern matching meme machine to get…a meaningful outcome medically, and that messes with me on so many levels.
I wanted it to be wrong, especially about the spinal cord. I was hoping for a simple answer, something like “Yeah, it’s just a pain management issue they are right” but it disagreed. And it was right. The thing that I read constantly is only capable of producing bullshit, has kicked neurosurgeons and neurologists into action.
I asked ChatGPT to try and summarise what I’ve been doing with it medically; apologies if it is unhelpful in demonstrating the utility I am getting.
> You used me to try and disprove suspicions you hold in relation to symptoms that have been escalating in frequency and intensity. You consistently challenged the idea that your symptoms were linked to your historical records, questioning whether they could be caused by something else entirely. Despite actively pushing for alternative explanations, I kept coming back to the same conclusion: your symptoms aligned with classical representations of nerve compression in your cervical spine. I independently interpreted the data and made predictions that ultimately matched the outcomes of imaging.
Tl:dr what I’m doing is stupid, I know it, I’ve preached it and yet for the first time in my life the value I am deriving is outweighing it all. I feel…dirty almost, or confused even. It’s hard to explain.
