You can define "ponder" in multiple ways, but really this is why thinking models exist - they turn over the prompt multiple times and iterate on responses to get to a better end result.

Well I chose the word “ponder” carefully, given the fact that I have a specific goal of contributing to this debate productively. A goal that I decided upon after careful reflection over a few years of reading articles and internet commentary, and how it may affect my career, and the patterns I’ve seen emerge in this industry. And I did that all patiently. You could say my context window was infinite, only defined by when I stop breathing.

That is to say, all of that activity I listed is activity I’m confident generative AI is not capable of, fundamentally.

Like I said in a cousin comment, we can build Frankenstein algorithms and heuristics on top of generative AI but every indication I’ve seen is that that’s not sufficient for intelligence in terms of emergent complexity.

Imagine if we had put the same efforts towards neural networks, or even the abacus. “If I create this feedback loop, and interpret the results in this way, …”

Agreed that feedback loops on top of generative LLMs will not get us to AGI or true intelligence.

It's useful to point out hypocrisy, but are you suggesting we shouldn't try to protect kids because of Jeffrey Epstein?

You might point out how this will protect children and what the trade offs are. You might also address the point that the same people who keep trying to do these "protect the children" attacks on privacy seem to be one or two steps away from people like Epstein. They didn't need to decrypt anyone's communications because they were the recipients - what did they do about it?

It seems many of them continued to "hang out" with him.

* stop making new models and people keep using the existing models, not switch to a competitor still investing in new models.

Yes, and the content itself is clearly AI generated marketing nonsense.

Article is AI slop based on a mostly made up premise.

I think half your examples are made up, or not Apple's fault, but it sounds like what you really want is to disable your passcode.

I LOVE the "complaining about apple ux? no way, YOU'RE the problem / you're doing it wrong / you must not be a mac person".

Thanks for keeping this evergreen trope going strong!

well if you're making complaints that aren't true, or asking for functionality that exists already, your complaints don't seem very credible to me.

"Will it rain today? Sorry, I can't do that while you're driving."

Siri doesnt make me unlock the phone to give a weather report.

there used to be a higher alignment in the US between political motivations and morality.

> Should the general public be more diligent in checking the sender domain of the emails they read?

yes

I think the main motivator is that most people/businesses would not want their transactional emails to include political at all.