[HN Gopher] Attenuating Innovation (AI)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Attenuating Innovation (AI)
        
       Author : todsacerdoti
       Score  : 58 points
       Date   : 2023-11-01 14:19 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (stratechery.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (stratechery.com)
        
       | sharadov wrote:
       | America will be the loser in this high-handed government approach
       | to regulate and stifle innovation.
        
         | paulryanrogers wrote:
         | Bad regulations are bad. That's why we don't want Sam (or
         | anyone else) to capture the regulators.
         | 
         | We still want enough regulations that humans aren't dragged to
         | the curb after every fender bender with a self-driving car.
        
         | seydor wrote:
         | YOu can always safely bet that it will be second to the EU
        
       | abss wrote:
       | While current Large Language Models (LLMs) offer impressive
       | capabilities, they exhibit significant limitations, particularly
       | in decision-making and planning. Establishing a robust
       | orchestration mechanism to guide LLMs' 'intelligent but error-
       | prone intuition' remains a considerable challenge. Realizing such
       | a system might take decades, if it is even feasible. The author
       | contends that utilizing fear as a marketing tactic is a facile
       | means to generate hype and solidify market dominance, often with
       | state support.
       | 
       | Success in human endeavors is a confluence of intelligence,
       | timing, and fortuitous events. Extrapolating this to hypothetical
       | future AI entities, it is unlikely that they would be exempt from
       | similar complexities. An AI capable of negating the factor of
       | 'luck' would likely require vast computational resources in a
       | short period, rendering it vulnerable and fragile
        
       | jay_kyburz wrote:
       | What I don't understand is why Windows continues to ignore
       | mobile. OK sure, you missed the start, but I think there is
       | plenty to room for a 3rd seat at the table. They just don't want
       | to do the hard work and grind it out. Sure 10 years of hard
       | grind, but mobile is not going anywhere.
       | 
       | Build a tight integration with the online stuff the are trying to
       | push. Bing, AI, Office Online. Enterprise will eat it up! They
       | could just give the phones out free with your Microsoft online
       | life subscription.
       | 
       | Its like nobody at windows really gives a fuck any more.
        
         | tempodox wrote:
         | All they can manage is to slap a bunch of ads on everything.
         | That probably already counts as hard grind.
        
         | belugacat wrote:
         | "The only problem with Microsoft is they just have no taste.
         | They have absolutely no taste. And I don't mean that in a small
         | way, I mean that in a big way, in the sense that they don't
         | think of original ideas, and they don't bring much culture into
         | their products."
        
         | AlexandrB wrote:
         | > Its like nobody at windows really gives a fuck any more.
         | 
         | I think this has been the case for a while. They're on their,
         | what, fifth[1] UI framework since Windows 7? Most of the
         | innovation seems to be in monetization and finding ways to
         | install Edge or make it the default browser.
         | 
         | [1] https://www.irrlicht3d.org/index.php?t=1626
        
         | paulryanrogers wrote:
         | Ignore?
         | 
         | They had Windows Mobile, bought Nokia, tried Windows Phone.
         | Devs didn't want to write apps for three platforms. So so have
         | since died.
        
           | jay_kyburz wrote:
           | My recollection is that they pulled the plug before anybody
           | had the time to finish an app. Things take time. Users and
           | Developers both want a nice solid foundation to build on.
           | 
           | Big tech need to stop thinking 1 year out and look 10 years
           | out if you ask me.
        
       | henrysg wrote:
       | Fantastic paragraph:
       | 
       | "The point is this: if you accept the premise that regulation
       | locks in incumbents, then it sure is notable that the early AI
       | winners seem the most invested in generating alarm in Washington,
       | D.C. about AI. This despite the fact that their concern is
       | apparently not sufficiently high to, you know, stop their work.
       | No, they are the responsible ones, the ones who care enough to
       | call for regulation; all the better if concerns about imagined
       | harms kneecap inevitable competitors."
        
         | kbenson wrote:
         | The other way to look at it is that it's an arms race. Just
         | because you believe something is problematic, that doesn't mean
         | that stopping research into it doesn't lead into problems in
         | its own right, and it can be hard to know what is the greater
         | evil (but generally consensus has been it's better to be in
         | control of that evil than to let someone else be in control of
         | it and use it against you).
         | 
         | I'm sure many of the scientists that worked on nuclear weaponry
         | over the years weren't in a hurry to see their work deployed,
         | but felt their country the more responsibly party to have that
         | capability, even if just to keep level with others.
        
         | lewhoo wrote:
         | If such cynical people are behind such powerful technology then
         | it might be the best argument for even harder regulations.
        
       | localhost wrote:
       | The Steve Jobs quote in response to Walt Mossberg's question:
       | 
       |  _The core functions of the device form factor formerly known as
       | the cellphone, whatever we want to call it -- the pocket device
       | -- what would you say the core functions are five years out?_
       | 
       | at the centerpiece of Ben's argument is lovely.
       | 
       |  _I don't know.
       | 
       | The reason I don't know is because I wouldn't have thought that
       | there would have been maps on it five years ago. But something
       | comes along, gets really popular, people love it, get used to it,
       | you want it on there. People are inventing things constantly and
       | I think the art of it is balancing what's on there and what's not
       | -- it's the editing function._
       | 
       | Contrast it with Bill Gates' answer to the same question:
       | 
       |  _How quickly all these things that have been somewhat
       | specialized -- the navigation device, the digital wallet, the
       | phone, the camera, the video camera -- how quickly those all come
       | together, that's hard to chart out, but eventually you'll be able
       | to make something that has the capability to do every one of
       | those things. And yet given the small size, you still won't want
       | to edit your homework or edit a movie on a screen of that size,
       | and so you'll have something else that lets you do the reading
       | and editing and those things. Now if we could ever get a screen
       | that would just roll out like a scroll, then you might be able to
       | have the device that did everything._
       | 
       | It makes me reflect on how important it is to remain humble about
       | the possibilities of AI and what developers can create using it
       | (and the tools that they will use to create it). _" And we are
       | just getting started"._
        
         | smallerfish wrote:
         | How wrong was Gates though? Maybe it's generational, but I
         | wouldn't want to edit homework or a movie on the screen. I
         | vastly prefer chatting and composing emails on desktop or a
         | laptop. I primarily use my phone for exactly the 5 things he
         | lists. I get the overall point, but he wasn't so wrong.
        
           | esafak wrote:
           | He wasn't, but he didn't show Jobs' humility. Jobs could have
           | given the same answer; he was no less visionary than Gates.
           | This interview was from 2007. Apple started work on tablets
           | (the Newton) in 1987, when they ran ads like this:
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umJsITGzXd0
        
             | cma wrote:
             | Is that vid an example of his visionariness? Jobs was fired
             | from Apple in 1985.
        
       | seydor wrote:
       | Tbf, the windows screenshot can totally serve as a precursor to
       | the iphone: It has "the one button" (start) that gives hierarchy
       | to the interface, the top/bottom bar and full-width menus. It
       | doesnt really look like desktop. The missing link is the lack of
       | decent touchscreen that gave life to all of it.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-11-01 23:01 UTC)