John Q. A @Pi33Heat

@JohnCornyn Sore looser @JohnCornyn has finally come out of the closet. He’s paid off by foreign influence, is a uniparty establishment prop, and in his own ruin exposed his own self interest oppressed to Texas and the Conservative movement. Voters saw through him finally. Good riddance!

Goosebumps. For all its faults, Western Christian culture is still worth defending.

@KyleAlthoff2 @GBPTrevor SMACKED

@GBPTrevor BIG cope for 6 losses in a row

@TitleTownTalks Pray for your QB. You’ve got no O-Line. Every team in the league knows how vulnerable you are with a 9% block-win rate on the blitz. A statistical factor worse from the next worst team in the league. Your coaching staff cannot adjust for a 2H. Tough!!

Last month I wrote about how we can build a positive and safe future for everyone: meta.com/thefutureisfor… Every lab has the responsibility and incentive to move at the pace required to train its models safely, and the ability to take its own actions to ensure that happens. The reality is: - People won't want to use agents that are misaligned with them and that don't do what they ask, so labs have a strong natural incentive to make their models more aligned. There is a lot of debate about slowing progress on capabilities until alignment catches up. My view is that trust and alignment are quickly becoming the most important capabilities that will differentiate agents and models. Any lab that doesn't focus on alignment will fall behind. - Labs face significant liability if their models cause harm, so they have a strong incentive to prevent this as well. Meta delayed shipping Muse for several months to focus on safety and security. We didn't call for everyone else to do this before we would. We just did it as part of our day-to-day work because it was clearly the right thing for people and for us. I'm proud of the security foundations we've built. - Engaging independent evaluators and advisors is industry best practice. MSL already does this today in several areas because it helps produce better work. Other labs can just do this too. In general, it would be helpful for there to be a larger and more diverse ecosystem of evaluators. - Committing the significant majority of compute towards serving people rather than racing towards recursive self-improvement is one of the best ways to ensure we develop this technology safely. Meta has made this commitment and other labs can do this as well. I believe the key to building a positive future for everyone is maintaining the right balance of power. This is within our power to do.

The fact that a bunch of AI oligarchs can conjure up a fake crisis, and then demand they get their own regulatory regime, and the Democrats wholesale buy into it, is very depressing.

Dario has written that we need to “pace the frontier,” and Sam has agreed. People may be surprised by my response: go ahead. You guys are the frontier. By any reasonable metric — market share, revenue growth, model capability — the two of you have a duopoly on frontier intelligence. You’ve also claimed the lead is widening because of recursive self-improvement. I don’t see what you see in the lab. If the unreleased models are scary enough that you think you should slow down, I support your decision to be responsible. But stop pretending you need anyone else’s permission. Stop pretending antitrust law has to be suspended so you can form a cartel. Stop pretending you need a regulatory approval process that supersedes product liability. Stop pretending METR is independent when it is intertwined with Anthropic’s investors and staff. Stop pretending you need those same evaluators to police competitors who aren’t even at the frontier. Most of all, stop pretending the motivation to slow down is purely altruistic. You face massive product-liability exposure if your products enable a truly damaging cyberattack. The market already punishes models that behave in unpredictable or unauthorized ways. After the Hugging Face episode, it is simply good business for OpenAI and Anthropic to trade some raw power for reliability and predictability. Call it alignment if you want. It is also just giving customers what they want. Pacing the frontier would also create breathing room for a more intelligent conversation about regulation than Bernie Sanders’ “shut it all down.” China is very unlikely to join a global agreement, as you know, and that has to be taken into account as well. So go ahead and pace the frontier. You are the ones setting it. The easiest way not to build superintelligence is for you to agree not to build it. Demanding your preferred regulatory framework as the price of that will look like blackmail of the public and the political system. So just do it. If you do, you’ll buy goodwill for the next conversation. If you don’t, we’ll know this was just another bid for regulatory capture — or an election-season psyop.

@bongdadovich @Anc_Aesthetics Tom Silkas*. Different guy

@Anc_Aesthetics @ColumbiaBugle @BizerbaUSA x.com/anc_aesthetics…

Aesthetica @Anc_Aesthetics

4 days ago

UPDATE: Bizerba USA reached out to me to let me know that Tom Silkas no longer works for Bizerba USA. Thank you Bizerba USA, please remove them from your lists.

124 1K 9K 184K 108

@spencerpratt @Daytobehappy Skew racial data of the perpetrators

@LebaneseJokerYT Lol buddy … I’ve got news for you. And did the vax effect you memory too?

@HistoryBoomer People forget Nazism is actually a far leftist ideology - socialism was their political policy, the bastard child of communism. State Authoritarianism is not at all “right-wing”

25 years of economic decline in the UK

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

@genzzztrade @FordFoundation

@MapQuest Irrelevant.

yeah wow I wonder what happened to Canada in 2015

Noah Smith 🐇🇺🇸🇺🇦🇹🇼 @Noahpinion

3 weeks ago

Until 2015, Canada and the U.S. were on the same growth track. Then Canada suddenly fell behind. What the fuck happened to Canada in 2015???

1K 618 6K 2.9M 1K

@hasanthehun Hasan - habibi, I’m not sure the jump cut editing prose you’re displaying is effective at proving a point. Other than your own anti-semitism… You’re reinforcing the prejudice you spew and make a living off of. Cry baby to your radical followers habibi. May Jesus save you

@hasanthehun “They hate democracy” … Says the communist🙄

The new mail-in ballot procedure isn’t something to be afraid of. It works like this: 1. The state provides a list of the ballots they intend to mail out. 2. USPS assigns a unique barcode to each. 3. When the ballot is mailed out, this barcode is scanned to ensure uniqueness and that it matches. If there is no match or it’s a duplicate, it is not delivered. 4. When the voter mails the ballot back, the USPS scans it again and checks to make sure it matches what went out and isn’t a duplicate. Any ballots that don’t match won’t be delivered. 5. This is all done on the exterior envelope. The USPS isn’t determining eligibility or deciding who gets a ballot. They can’t see the actual votes. They are essentially just ensuring there are no duplicates, that the number mailed in isn’t greater than the number mailed out, and that the person mailing one in was the same person who received them. This is a common sense solution and is completely reasonable. Why would anyone oppose it unless their intention is to cheat?