The problem with that argument as I see it is that a lot of jobs can be described that way if you want.
And it's not just these; i.e. video generation is getting better every other week too. It's not yet good enough to produce full length movies but it's getting there and the main component that seems to be missing is just more control over the generated output, but that'll come too.
You might say these movies will be AI slop and you'd be right, but then that'll be enough for most people who just want to see a lot of shit blow up on screen and superhereos fighting other superhereos.
You will still have a niche for 'real actor' films, but it will become a niche.
Is it just me or are the 'open source' models increasingly impractical to run on anything other than massive cloud infra at which point you may as well go with the frontier models from Google, Anthropic, OpenAI etc.?
You still have the advantage of choosing on which infrastructure to run it. Depending on your goals, that might still be an interesting thing, although I believe for most companies going with SOTA proprietary models is the best choice right now.
It's because their target audience are enterprise customers who want to use their cloud hosted models, not local AI enthusiasts. Making the model larger is an easy way to scale intelligence.
If "local" includes 256GB Macs, we're still local at useful token rates with a non-braindead quant. I'd expect there to be a smaller version along at some point.
90% of startups coming out of Israel seem to be some dodgy 'security' or spyware startups.
This in addition to them boasting of having 'field tested' their stuff on Palestinians, which is also why U.S. cops go there for training. I suppose to learn from the 'real experts' how to suppress the masses.
This is not true. It's just "dodgy security/spyware" startups are more open coming from Israel that they exist than the myriad of hidden companies that you never heard about because they focus on tailored exploits.
Israel is the British colonialism foreign base where the Brits and the US can dodge their own laws while developing their own "defence" hardware, software, tactics, and ideology.
>where the Brits and the US can dodge their own laws while developing their own [...]
Source that a large proportion of founders/employees are actually American/British? The more believable claim is that such Israeli startups are US/UK backed, but that's not as damning as it sounds, because US/UK is the finance hub, so thats where you expect funding to come from, rather than "colonialism foreign base" or whatever.
Meh, imho it's much simpler: Israel has had insane security needs since it's birth, thus naturally security firms concentrated where there was an immediate market and testing possibility.
Which makes the failure of October 7th even more striking. It's insane Israeli leadership hasn't paid for this.
Nope. I see it completely differently. We know for a fact that all CEOs of big tech are either Jewish zios (Israeli citizens by birth) or have spouses who are such or are in that zios link.
They also establish the so called “R&D” offices in Israel which is code-word for free software export.
Then the same country that has access to the source code of the major American tech firms, combobulates the “best” in class spyware doesn’t come as a surprise.
We keep crying wolf to Chinese tech spies when the real wolf are these. That’s a tiny nation living off of 300MM large nation and its allies make that another 400MM.
IIRC there were attempts to impeach the government (as well as multiple probes) but they all fell through. Same as 9/11, really. Plus, Israel hasn't had an election since.
So the Palestinians and Arabs thought a hundred years ago. It served them badly.
It’s not that US/UK and others don’t get anything out of the relationship, as you note. But the arrows have been mostly pointing the other way for a long time. Trump and his background, as well as Epstein/Mandelson/McSweeney/Labour are just the latest, blatant examples of how this works.
That is some nasty garbage right there. The Israeli tech startup scene is very large and dynamic with including basic software development tools, wireless infrastructure, and so on. If anything it is more like 90% either consumer infrastructure or non-LLM developer tools. Whether it is politically advantageous to talk about or not, a very large fraction of all economic activity is still down the chain near the child needs bowl of rice level. Grandiose claims without support only obfuscate the situation instead of focusing on what needs to be done to protect people.
> 90% of startups coming out of Israel seem to be ...
Not to claim that Israel is the land of saintly virtues - but if your news sources are inclined toward tech or polarized left/right politic, they make sure that's what you see. Wouldn't matter if 99.9% of actual Israeli startups were working to build better home bagel-makers, or gene-engineering perfect breeds of salmon for lox.
Israel being founded with the help of terrorist groups like Irgun and Lehi and their current prime minister as well as former defense minister being wanted for war crimes, excuse me if I don't take their word as to whom they're fighting for granted. Especially not after what they did in Gaza.
I heard many bizarre conspiracy theories about Jewish people. But this one, I can't even understand what you mean.
To be clear, do you deny that there are multiple terrorist groups targeting civilians in Israel such as Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, and multiple individuals who attacked civilians indiscriminately with bombs, knives and guns?
Do you deny that Israel uses its intelligence services to detect and stop these terrorist attacks?
The original comment was "To be clear, do you think it's bad to use technology to detect and stop terrorism?", and the reply said he wouldn't "take their word as to whom they're fighting".
I asked if the person was denying that Israel intelligence seeks to detect and stop terrorism from those major terrorist groups and from individual terrorists. How on earth is this a "bad faith argument"?
No, the original argument was that Israel - spelled out for you, because you are pretending you missed it - is using these technologies for the brutal suppression of the whole of the of the Palestinian people and that the overt motive of "fighting terrorism" is used as a fig-leaf to hide the ulterior motive of ethnically cleansing the Palestinians from their lands.
Your question, which was really an assertion, asking if "it's bad to use technology to detect and stop terrorism" is in bad faith, because you know very precisely that the person you were replying to does not think it's bad to "use technology to detect and stop terrorism", but instead you were using that question as a rhetorical device to assert that all Israel is doing is the overt action "detect and stop terrorism" in an effort to deny that Israel is also doing the ulterior ethnically cleaning.
Whether that is true or not can be debated, but the way you are asking the question is pre-supposing that it cannot be debated, because your assertion by asking that question is that the ulterior motive does not exist and you are trying to create a "gotcha".
You then went on to call the claim that Irgun and Lehi were terrorist organizations and/or the claim that two members of the Israeli government ware wanted for war crimes and/or the claim that the Israeli government might have overt as well as ulterior motives and therefore they might not be trusted on what they overtly say alone, a "bizzare conspiracy theory" about Jewish people in an effort to undermine these claims without judging them based on factfulness or truth.
I hope I cleared that up for you.
I tried to ask an LLM to be an impartial judge and give your comment a hasbara score, but it immediately banned me.
You are wrong. My question was not "in bad faith". It is unfortunate but multiple people really do believe that it is bad that Israel is able to detect and stop terrorism through technology. There are multiple comments even in this post that openly support terrorist organizations such as Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis.
Instead of assuming you can read my mind and falsely accuse me of saying stuff in bad faith, it would be better if you weren't so arrogant.
To your other point, I called it a bizarre conspiracy theory because it is in fact a quite bizarre conspiracy theory! The comment didn't say that Israel was using the facial recognition for doing X in addition to stopping terrorism. It simply denied that it was even being used to stop terrorism at all ("would not take their word as to whom they're fighting").
Again, that's a completely bizarre conspiracy theory. There has been an immense amount of terrorism against Israel (and it would have been much more without Israeli intelligence). If that happened in any country there would be a huge intelligence effort to stop that terrorism and it would be natural and justified. Compare to e.g. what the US did when it suffered 9/11 (why do we need to take our shoes off at airport security?). Yet for the case of Israel the comment implies that somehow all the terrorism doesn't matter, the Israeli people don't care about suffering terrorist attacks multiple times larger than 9/11 and a constant threat to be genocided if another October 7th turns into a full war. What the Israeli Jews really did, according to that comment, is to just pretend to fight terrorism ("would not take their word as to whom they're fighting"), to fight some mysterious thing instead! Do you not realize how that's absurd?
If you are arguing in good faith, why are you not reading what you are arguing about.
The full quote is:
> excuse me if I don't take their word as to whom they're fighting for granted. Especially not after what they did in Gaza.
That claim is not as as absolute as you make it out. It does not mean "Israel is lying about everything". "Not taking for granted" just means not to assume everything is true without questioning it. It just means, as I put it earlier: there is an overt thing being said, but there is also the suspicion of an ulterior motive.
The comment then goes on to give you a reason to be suspicious which in this case is the destruction of Gaza along with the atrocities the Israelis committed and the well documented dehumanizing rhetoric that points to a hatred against Palestinians as a whole that exists in Israeli society.
That comment doesn't argue that "somehow all the terrorism doesn't matter" - it says, there is more to it than just terrorism.
I am not sure why you are calling this a "mysterious thing" or "absurd" or "bizarre" - if you read any zionist literature or follow any zionist discussions, online or offline, then that viewpoint is regularly being expressed.
Or if you need another clue that technology is used for oppression and not just defense, go look at the West Bank and the land theft that is taking place there and how that is implemented.
Look, if you want to have a good faith political argument you need to consider that the people who you are arguing against are not all just crazy and stupid and that you somehow are in possession of some information that they somehow are not. People have different reasons for arguing different positions.
If you do not in fact actually believe that another person is arguing something crazy and bizarre, but instead you are using this as a rhetorical trick, then that is the almost the definition if arguing in bad faith.
But if you do actually believe someone's claim is crazy, mysterious or absurd, simply because you are refusing to understand their argument, then you are not contributing to discussion, and you need to go back and try to understand how it is possible that someone could come to a different understanding of a situation than you. You don't have to agree with it, you just need to understand it's possible.
Edit: Check how apropos the news is today
> “Destroy the idea of an Arab terror state; finally, formally and practically cancel the cursed Oslo Accords and get on the path of sovereignty, while encouraging migration both from Gaza and from Judea and Samaria,” said Smotrich, using the biblical term for the West Bank. “There is no other long-term solution.”
You selectively quoted the comment in your reply, leaving out some crucial information in order to set up a straw man argument.
I just helpfully pointed this out to you, because you were asking why someone was accusing you of arguing in bad faith. You can do with that whatever you wish.
If you are interested in why it's easy to recognize your way or arguing ( and I just want to note that it was not me who accused you of 'bad faith' argumentation in the first place), I can recommend Schopenhauer's "Die Kunst Recht zu behalten"[0] - your original
> To be clear, do you think it's bad to use technology to detect and stop terrorism?
shows up there as Chapter 7 "Yield Admissions Through Questions" among others.
You will note that I gave you an entire explanation to your specific assertions instead of just pointing to some book.
The thing about that is, though, that it's a bit boring sometimes because It often seems like every thought has already been though before. We humans seem to like to go in a circle. Just like the two us are doing right now.
> You selectively quoted the comment in your reply, leaving out some crucial information in order to set up a straw man argument.
You are wrong again. I quoted the comment as "he wouldn't take their word as to whom they're fighting" to highlight how the comment is denying that Israel is fighting terrorism. It is quite simple. There is no crucial information to be left out. Also it doesn't make sense to call that a "straw man argument" given that I simply repeated his comment and highlighted why it was absurd.
> I just helpfully pointed this out to you, because ...
Yes, I do believe Israel is using 'fighting terrorism' as cover for 'changing reality on the ground' (genocide of Palestinians in Gaza and at the very least displacement and ethnic cleansing in the West Bank).
No I do not believe Jewish people as a general group are part of any conspiracy or whatever nonsense you tried to bring up to deflect from addressing the facts I pointed out in my comments.
You then had the meaning of my comments explained very well to you and still refused to address them.
To put it as plainly as possible and beyond doubt, so that even you can understand, when Israel says they're fighting terrorism, it's not that such a thing would be bad, it's that they're doing things that do not fit that metric by any stretch of the imagination, (mass murder of civilians, using starvation as a weapon of war, holding hostages indefinitely without a fair trial, imprisoning children, using area weapons in heavily populated urban areas, appropriating land that is not theirs, assisting Israeli terrorists in terrorizing Palestinians in the West Bank, attacking countries despite a 'ceasefire' etc,)
The fact that it was you who brought Jewish people into the conversation when they weren't mentioned before, as if either you or Israel spoke for them, shows that your argument was in bad faith.
Except the English articles are not generally fearmongering, more praising of the 'bursting' Israeli tech scene. It's only when you look at what the startups do you realize what's up.
It makes sense in a way, most Israelis probably acquire a fair bit of skills and contacts as part of being in the military there. And because the military 'needs' to surveil millions of people it rules over without any mandate whatsoever, what better way to get a contract than to enhance the surveillance capabilities of the army once you get back into civilian life?
You are either plainly lying or have an incredibly strange media consumption landscape. The plurality tech startups coming out of Israel are in biological sciences and medicine.
Iced indeed seems very neat. Egui is developed by a single person and so is Iced. The difference is that Egui has been quite stable whereas Iced has gone through several rewrites, as far as I can tell. It's why I didn't dive into it more, even though I like how Iced looks and focuses on the Elm model.
The Iced developer is quote open regarding his goals, which is appreciated. So while it's a nice library, it's a hard one to adopt.
Not sure why this is being downvoted, Blow started working on Jai in 2014, by which point Rust was already nearing stabilization with 1.0 shipping in 2015.
In fact Rust was specifically discussed as a possible alternative to the C++ status quo in Jon's initial "A Programming Language For Games" talk which roughly marks the inception of his current / upcoming language.
And it's not just these; i.e. video generation is getting better every other week too. It's not yet good enough to produce full length movies but it's getting there and the main component that seems to be missing is just more control over the generated output, but that'll come too.
You might say these movies will be AI slop and you'd be right, but then that'll be enough for most people who just want to see a lot of shit blow up on screen and superhereos fighting other superhereos.
You will still have a niche for 'real actor' films, but it will become a niche.
Same for music, art etc.
reply