It can’t even write a passable novel… if you know of a great LLM-authored novel I should read please point me to it and I’ll take your recommendation!

AI can already easily emulate human creative output [1][2] and there is zero change that you or anyone else can reliably detect AI output with any degree of consistency.

Even with the few 'tell tale' patterns it's been leaving ... that threshold is being moved past quite quickly. Within not even 6 months, works will be identical for all bus some specific activities.

[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147738802... [2] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41077-025-00396-6...

> apple's hardware lead & overall design philosophy is falling apart

What?? Could someone tell me where I can buy hardware as good as a MBP? Genuinely I’d love this, it would be like Christmas had come early!

https://frame.work/laptop13pro :)

intel panther lake changed the game.

I do the same!

I’d guess one reason is that there has been no iPad/App Store/YouTube invented for dogs…

I have a gut feeling there will be negative consequences for how much time developing minds spend consuming but in the absence of clear cut evidence it seems to be the default.

Maybe a nit: LLMs do not and cannot cite their sources (at least scraped sources for the purpose of training)

It’s kind of the harness that is doing the citing (or providing the context for the model to).

But an LLM sans search can reproduce some copyrighted work with minor variations and there’s no way to know exactly where it came from.

What? If I want to read Harry Potter or watch The Matrix an AI cannot produce something equally as good for me. So I need to pay those people, or break the law.

For lots of online knowledge/blogs I guess it is true but even here I often read explainer blogs because AI casts everything in a certain narrative/tone that isn’t always appropriate.

> If I want to read Harry Potter or watch The Matrix an AI cannot produce something equally as good for me.

Yet

This is how the drug industry already works. I don’t think there’s any evidence “AI” (LLM) is capable of producing valid drug modifications.

In current status AI models cannot do that. But, if they do then it will break Medical Patent model.

The value in Medical patents is not the idea. It is the process of proving efficacy and safety. Which are the expensive parts. And I doubt we will trust AI with those any time soon. We grand Medical Patents because proving things is expensive and that process needs to be encouraged.

Copying was prohibitively expensive.

The original statement was about there being little incentive to create a work you don't "own"

Difficulty in copying is irrelevant to owning it.

Moreover, this does not address music or spoken word. A pre-copyright musician can just listen to a piece and play it in the next town over. A poet or storyteller can just memorize a work and retell it.

>> previous comment said "Copying was prohibitively expensive."

I think this statement does have important truth value in it! Copying books used to be done by hand (someone writing manually). Then printing press came, which lead to problems. And that is when copyright concept and law was created!

PS: IANAL and nor a historian. Just sharing my current understanding.

Mistiming is equivalent to being wrong. And Musk is good at keeping valuations high! So who knows when it will tank.

I mean he is basically an influencer at this point? I guess this is a marketing play and we will be hearing more from him than ever.

Lots of translucent blobs composited to produce the appearance of a strawberry.

There is no mesh or model. The visual surface of the strawberry could be made up of blobs spaced far apart physically and not where the surface appears to be.

This is why they are called radiance fields, they model the light not the geometry.

Practically the blobs positions/rotations can be constrained to better physically match the geometry of a strawberry.

I'm not sure i agree. The blobs are exactly where the surface appear to be because they are constrained by multiple viewing angles.

Otherwise the splat would fall apart as soon as the viewing angle is changed slightly (Which it absolutely does in many examples on supersplat, you cannot really create an out of distribution view with 3GS, it's not magic)

Yes, my statement was loose. The blob doesn’t really have a position since it is theoretically an infinite distribution in 3 space.

It has a mean, and that mean doesn’t have to lie on the surface, consider the case where the mean is deep inside the strawberry but its spike contributes to the surface appearance (e.g a seed could be represented this way, or it could be represented by a small well-oriented blob on the surface, the optimiser doesn’t care)