One thing that's under appreciated on the website of the demos is the Stanford demo where Ben showed uh anywhere between 3 to 25 images you can reconstruct that entire Stanford quad. But the thing is we had to show it from aerial view. But every single input image is been standing on the ground taking a picture from the ground. So, everything you see are generated but according to the laws of reconstruction.
people ask us if we'll train our own model and the answer currently is no
1. we are too dumb to
2. there's plenty of other well funded efforts
3. we need to remain a neutral ground for models to battle
The left is on a project to enforce equality, despite biology and markets.
The goal of equality gives claim to the moral high ground, but contradicting biology and markets requires censorship and violence, which makes the whole project immoral.
Chips come from the ground. Where's the energy come from? And a lot of people are like, "Oh, it comes from the sun." Yeah, it comes from the sun. But how are you capturing it from the sun? From stuff made from the ground, right?
Top-down works well if leadership is good enough to be in the weeds and be specifically correct. I think where it falls apart is where you don't actually know ground truth and then you attempt to manage people from above and that's where I think the term micromanagement comes from.
This is a supersonic engine adapted for ground power generation that can ship without the rest of the airplane, thereby generating the test data, the learnings, the reliability, and also the capital that we need to go big.
Those first jetliners truly did double the speed of what had come before them. And was they doubled the speed of air travel, the most important changes were on the ground. Hawaii was simply not a tourist destination before the speed of the jet.
We can we can teach we can teach somebody, I think, to be a really good AI developer in a few months. You can build enough intuition where you are, you know, accelerated off the ground and you can go like keep growing there. It's really hard to teach someone a CS undergrad program in in 3 months.
basically the idea is like the IDE of the future needs to be rethought from the ground up for agents. And it might not even be a like I don't know a lot of editors kind of started with the text field and bolted on an agents tab.
And it just so turns out that um this was extremely early, way too early. so early that we shouldn't have been working on that, you know, uh because um if you're just stumbling your way around and keyboard mashing and mouse clicking and trying to get rewards in these environments, um your reward is too sparse and you just won't learn and you're going to burn a forest uh computing and you're never actually going to get something off the ground.
So there's no ground truth. You can't have prior knowledge if you don't have ground truth because the prior knowledge is supposed to be a hint or an initial belief about what the truth is.
And yeah, big theropods, T-rex, is going to be a power walker. It's not going to run in the conventional biomechanical sense where both feet are off the ground at once.
And the impact of solar array on desert is arguably positive because it shades the ground and improves like soil moisture retention. Um there like if you wanted to reverse desertification, you would basically just deploy solar panels on it and that would pay for the process.
The code in an agent that actually “does stuff” with code is not, itself, AI. This should reassure you. It’s surprisingly simple systems code, wired to ground truth about programming in the same way a Makefile is.
Except in practice, judging from the report of founder after founder, what this often turns out to mean is: hire professional fakers and let them drive the company into the ground.
The thing about the far-right parties is that they are trying to get people to equate all foreigners in a country with a threat to our future, but they are only gaining ground because of their ability to generate fear.
flat burrs tend to send the coffee preferentially on one side of the portafilter (to the right side with the design of EG-1), an effect probably worsened by the use of high rpm.
A korrent is a belief a person has stated in their own words: one
sentence stating the claim, backed by a quote and a source, kept at
korrents.com.
Under a name here, the quoted block is what they actually said.
The korrent beneath it is the claim those words support, in
korrents' wording — tap it to see the record, its source, and who
else holds it.
Nobody here wrote their own korrents. They are compiled from public
statements, and a person can change their mind, which is recorded too.
About the English under a post
Some people here publish in a language other than English. Where they
do, this site shows a machine translation beneath the post, in
this typeface — the site's own, not theirs.
The post itself is never changed, moved or hidden: what is set in the
serif above is exactly what the person published, and it is what to
quote them on. A translation can be wrong in ways that matter,
especially about tone.
Only the post's own words are translated. A quoted post, a linked
article and a belief on korrents.com
are left in their original language.