> 1. The intelligence of an AI model roughly equals the log of the resources used to train and run it.
We are burning cash so fast and getting very little in return for it. This is a death spiral and we refuse to admit it.
> The cost to use a given level of AI falls about 10x every 12 months, and lower prices lead to much more use.
We are entirely unconcerned with accuracy and refuse to see how the limitations of our product will not allow us to follow this simple economic aphorism into success.
> The socioeconomic value of linearly increasing intelligence is super-exponential in nature.
You see, even though we're burning money at an exponentially increasing rate, some how this /linear/ increase in output is secretly "super-exponential" in nature. I have nothing to back this up but you just have to believe me.
At least Steve Jobs build something worth having before bullshitting about it. This is just embarassing.
We are burning cash so fast and getting very little in return for it. This is a death spiral and we refuse to admit it.
> The cost to use a given level of AI falls about 10x every 12 months, and lower prices lead to much more use.
We are entirely unconcerned with accuracy and refuse to see how the limitations of our product will not allow us to follow this simple economic aphorism into success.
> The socioeconomic value of linearly increasing intelligence is super-exponential in nature.
You see, even though we're burning money at an exponentially increasing rate, some how this /linear/ increase in output is secretly "super-exponential" in nature. I have nothing to back this up but you just have to believe me.
At least Steve Jobs build something worth having before bullshitting about it. This is just embarassing.