Register and share your invite link to earn from video plays and referrals.

Search results for 305
305 community
One keyword maps to one global community path.
Create community
People
Not Found
Tweets including 305
so We have 1.0 on Monday 1.1 today Shall we do 1.2 right-away? Or wait a bit? We go so quick, I want to save some face for Claude and GPT. I’m serious.
Tell me a reason Why you haven’t use THIS / THAT Model
THIS / THAT model has already processed 20,766 decisions thru @flock_io API.. And we have even more users hosting themselves. DeAI is for real.
with even crazier benchmarks evolved just in one day FLock it.
and it is just the begining...
nobody should patronize those who newly have opinions about third party evaluators. non-experts forming opinions fast is part of the american tradition. the constitution itself was, in a very important sense, vibe coded by 20 somethings with concepts of a plan. but newbies being fleeced is also part of the american tradition. “caveat emptor” is a provision of a contract signed by an adult, not some god-given right to be treated as something other than a little child. you will be treated as a child no matter what. you are the buyer. it is your job to beware.
Show more
same reporter who did that nasty hit piece on caleb watney btw
There’s an impulse in American politics, a set of tactics and drives that has proven very effective at extinguishing speech. We once called it McCarthyism. Another time we called it Wokeism. One day in the future we will have some name for the campaign that is underway against all people who believe in serious AI risks, and whatever that name ends up being, it will be yet another name for that old impulse. It’s an ugly one. I recommend you avoid being a part of it, no matter your politics or your thoughts on AI. I suggest you think for yourself. You really do want to worry about the state projecting too much power over AI, centralizing control or robbing us of the unambiguous benefits of the technology in the name of preserving the economic status quo. But there really are grave risks from AI that go beyond what any other mass-market digital technology has posed. These two things aren’t totalizing worldviews that exist in conflict. You don’t need to believe only one or the other. *Both of them are true.* The question should not be “which facts should we ignore, and which should we pay attention to?” The question is: “how do we walk the narrow corridor between all these realities which are in deep tension with one another?” You should think for yourself. Assess other people’s work for yourself rather than allowing powerful people to put a label on them for you. As someone who has been a journey that has taken me to different perceived “sides” of the AI debate, believe me: You’ll find that there are bright and thoughtful people on both the “safety” and “accelerate” sides, and you will also find that both sides have their imbeciles, charlatans, and, occasionally, true cretins. It’s your job to figure out what’s what. Don’t let other people think for you. Don’t be played a fool.
Show more