Partner with the others and build a product / company...
A startup of your own still looks fine on your resume.
Readit Newsioulaum commented on Ask HN: I'm an MIT senior and still unemployed – and so are most of my friends · Posted by u/MITthrow123
ioulaum commented on Animate Anyone 2: High-Fidelity Character Image Animation humanaigc.github.io/anima... · Posted by u/ToJans
Wonder if they're planning to release code.
I imagine some opensource player will try to recreate their model themselves too.
There must be a dystopian scifi story about a society that willingly outsources its legal system to an AI system which can serve as a judge.
You'd almost definitely get more consistency. And improving the system would be easier.
Whereas the biases of human judges can be hard to detect, and even if you could correct one judge, that fix doesn't propagate to other judges with the same flaw.
Because if there is one thing that we desperately need as a species is more complex and harder to understand laws.
The idea isn't to make them harder to understand, but rather to make them more consistent, nuanced, and aware of the real world in ways that politicians might not be.
Not only is this a mindbogglingly terrible idea with the currently imperfect state of AI. Even if in the following years we hypothetically have a fully auditable, open-source, open-weights AI which is guaranteed 100% to never make mistakes, a law should never be so complex that you need a superhuman AI to write it.
The implication isn't so much that AI will write laws, as it is that it can raise standards, make things clearer and more detailed.
And... Enable better understanding of context, since unlike human politicians, most LLMs have very board knowledge.
So it should reduce some of the automatic bad decision making that comes from bureaucrats making laws about things they don't (and maybe can't) understand.
If you ignore the complexity added by divided governments, the idea of using LLMs to help draft laws, because they can understand many more domains than the average human, is kinda interesting.
ioulaum commented on Explainer: What's r1 and everything else? timkellogg.me/blog/2025/0... · Posted by u/Philpax
Interesting article, but the flourish ending """AI will soon (if not already) increase in abilities at an exponential rate."""
is not at all substantiated. Would be nice to know how the author gets to that conclusion.
The exponential part may be iffy, but it is self improving.
And this same RL is also creating improvements in small model performance.
So, more LLMs are about to rise in quality.
ioulaum commented on CIA now favors lab leak theory to explain Covid's origins nytimes.com/2025/01/25/us... · Posted by u/doctaj
I like how you have high confidence in the CIA.
If you don't have extra evidence, and the you don't trust the CIA, then what base do you have for your assumption?
Wanting human like causes for problems is how humanity invented gods. So that they could feel more under control by trying to appease the now humanized force.
Of course, if the problem went away after you prayed, that would really just have been luck. Even though it strengthened your belief.
ioulaum commented on CIA now favors lab leak theory to explain Covid's origins nytimes.com/2025/01/25/us... · Posted by u/doctaj
US intelligence likely has more evidence than they will publicly discuss. It is a matter of public record that parts of US intelligence (not CIA) had been tracking COVID in China since at least November of 2019. That they coincidentally happened to be johnny-on-the-spot when the initial infection(s) happened, long before anyone was paying attention or trying to create a narrative, suggests that they probably have more context around the conditions of the initial infections than they will ever disclose. How they managed to be "right place, right time" to observe the initial stages raises all kinds of interesting questions that aren't going to be answered.
However, what the (classified) evidence indicates is somewhat separate from whatever public posture the CIA finds useful to take.
They could as well say "We aren't sharing our real sources, but we have high confidence."
But they are saying that they have low confidence, and that there is no new evidence that changes anything.
They're just changing the way they're biased, because they think that the lab's conditions weren't particularly safe.
But then, we might as well expect that dozens of dangerous viruses should've gotten out.
I'm going to challenge this as you didn't give specific data to back it up. I read an article recently that did have data, and it made the argument that first jobs, and first salaries, tend to be remarkably "sticky". That is, if you are desperate for a job out of college so take one that causes you to be underemployed and underpaid, that doesn't just stick with you for your first job, but data showed that people were underemployed and underpaid for at least a decade after college.
The advice in this article was to hold out as long as possible for a desirable job, which meant a ton of networking, taking internships if possible, and also possibly additional schooling.
Apologies for not having the article on hand, but here's another one I found in 30 seconds of googling that makes the same argument, with research:
https://www.highereddive.com/news/half-of-graduates-end-up-u...
Which may just mean that they need to stay focused on self-improvement and job hopping as possible.