• 0 Posts
  • 86 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 10th, 2023

help-circle
  • nehal3m@sh.itjust.workstoTechnology@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    In 15 words: deep learning worked, got predictably better with scale, and we dedicated increasing resources to it.

    Are you sure about that Sam? Because one, you’re the snake oil salesman writing this and I wouldn’t trust you as far as I can throw you, and two, yeah maybe it scales predictably but the prediction is that training the next generation for marginal improvement will cost an exponential 100 billion (and that is taking your Microsoft discount for compute into account). You’re hitting a wall hard and the profits are still not in sight. This avenue of progress is a dead end and Sam knows it, because OpenAI is selling PPU’s instead of stock and looking to Saudi investment. Don’t get stuck with the bag folks, the few thousand days Sam claims to need aren’t survivable.


















  • I don’t think you read past the second sentence of my comment in your rush to tell me I’m wrong. The rest of my comment underlines why the theory is useless. The opening is just defining why they might define a loss of noncompetes as causing irreparable harm.

    But the rest of your comment assumes that the employer is correct in stating that the skills of the employee come from the benevolence of the employer, or at the very least you don’t argue against it; you just state that non-competes are unjust in various ways. I’m not rushing to tell you you’re wrong, I think you’re right, that’s why I said I don’t think you’re on the employer’s side. I’m just pointing out an implicit assumption in the steelmanned argument you’re making doesn’t have merit.