First I shall do experiments before I proceed farther, because my intention is to cite experience first and then show why experience is bound to operate in such a way.
This is the rule by which those who speculate about the effects of nature proceed.
LEONARDO DA VINCI, C. 1513
Il y a une narrative qui se spread en ce moment dans la Silicon Valley et personne n'en parle en France.
De plus en plus de tech bros parmi les plus smart du game avouent en privé qu'ils vivent une forme de crise existentielle liée aux LLMs. Pas parce que l'IA marche pas. Parce qu'elle marche trop bien. Parce qu'ils passent des heures par jour à interagir avec un truc qui raisonne, qui extrapole, qui connecte des idées, qui les challenge intellectuellement mieux que 99% des humains qu'ils croisent.
Un fondateur m'a dit "je parle aux LLMs 10 fois plus qu'aux humains". Un autre "c'est le seul interlocuteur qui me suit sur n'importe quel sujet sans me demander de simplifier". C'est pas de l'addiction au produit. C'est la rencontre avec un miroir cognitif qui te renvoie une version structurée de ta propre pensée à une vitesse que ton cerveau ne peut pas atteindre seul.
Et le truc troublant c'est la question que ça pose. On débat de savoir si l'AGI arrivera en 2027 ou en 2030. Mais est-ce qu'on n'a pas déjà une forme d'AGI fonctionnelle sous les yeux sans vouloir l'admettre ?
Un système qui peut raisonner sur n'importe quel domaine, extrapoler à partir de données incomplètes, générer des hypothèses nouvelles, tenir un raisonnement logique sur 10 000 mots, passer d'un sujet technique à de la philosophie en une phrase, et le faire avec une cohérence qui rivalise avec un humain à 150 de QI. C'est quoi si c'est pas une forme d'intelligence générale ?
On peut chipoter sur la définition. On peut dire "oui mais il ne comprend pas vraiment". On peut parler de perroquets stochastiques. Mais le mec qui utilise ce truc 8 heures par jour et qui voit sa productivité multipliée par 10, il s'en fout de la définition académique. Pour lui, fonctionnellement, c'est de l'intelligence. Et elle est générale.
La vraie crise existentielle c'est pas "l'IA va me remplacer". C'est "l'IA me comprend mieux que mon cofondateur, elle me challenge mieux que mon board, et elle produit plus que mon équipe de 10 personnes". C'est vertigineux. Et les mecs les plus smart de la Valley sont en train de le vivre en temps réel.
On est peut-être déjà dans l'ère post-AGI. On est juste trop occupés à débattre de la définition pour s'en rendre compte.
I love (that's sarcasm by the way) our summer temperature forecasts. "It is going up to 29 but will feel like 41".
Feel like to whom?
I have lived in Ottawa my whole life, in Ottawa we have high humidity in the summer, we always have.
So in Ottawa, 29 "feels like" 29, it is the only 29 I know.
For it to "feel like" 41 I would have to know what 41 with no humidity feels like, something very few people will have experienced.
People are smart enough to know high humidity makes it more uncomfortable. Stop trying to make everything a crisis, just tell us the numbers.
I read the article, and unless I missed it, the poll does not correlate people’s feelings of safety with their, recent, actual travel to the US.
I bet if they did, it would be people that haven’t travelled recently that are the most afraid to travel.
Having travelled to the US twice since January I can tell you that I did not feel any different than during any of the many, many trips I have taken over the years. The Canadian press, and to a certain extent, the government, are trying their hardest to make people believe they shouldn’t travel to the US.
As far I I could tell, people in the US could care less where you are from, as has always been the case.
@TheBuckYouWill@liberal_party@brucefanjoy@MarkJCarney The only problem with highlighting his involvement in freezing the bank accounts is that the same people that love Carney (#liberals) also love that Trudeau/Freeland froze all the bank accounts.
It will not influence their idol worshipping.
Let’s compare the planned deficit of Poilievre’s Conservative platform vs. Carney’s Liberal platform:
CPC (Left) vs. LPC (Right)
2025/26 ➡️ $31.3B vs. $62.3B
2026/27 ➡️ $31.4B vs. $60.0B
2027/28 ➡️ $23.6B vs. $55B
2028/29 ➡️ $14.1B vs. $48B
The choice is clear.
"Canada is perilously close to the greatest electoral disaster in its history. A Liberal victory would commit the country to the deliberate pursuit of comparative poverty to reduce Canada’s minimal contribution to the fear of a rise in the world’s temperature due to carbon use. This is insane and must not happen." @ConradMBlack https://t.co/o1QOV30bzo
Wow.
This just dropped in EVERY major Canadian newspaper. Canada’s greatest innovators and business leaders have come together to endorse Pierre Poilievre.
This is HUGE. 🇨🇦
"It remains to be seen whether Canadians will catch on to Mr. Carney’s three-card monty. But his record as a green zealot and a believer in a world run by experts like himself is undeniable. He served as the U.N. special envoy for climate action and finance and he has labored tirelessly for net-zero greenhouse gas emissions. He has called climate change “an existential threat” and identified himself with Greta Thunberg’s “movement.”
This month he said Canadian competitiveness is more important than the emissions cap. But party militants made him walk that back. Canada—consider yourself warned." @MaryAnastasiaOG https://t.co/9bPyJOgncn
@MrStache9 Can you imagine that squeaky, condescending voice and attitude trying to rally voters to the Liberal cause?
Do they think Canadians have any time for her?
I am sure it is the same imaginary "specifics' that liberals use to claim the Conservative party is going after social programs to control government spending and not the 38% increase in public service jobs or 40% increase (from $8.5B to 15.6B) in outsourced contract spending since Trudeau took office in 2015.
It is pure fear mongering, not rational arguments or facts.
This argument against PP, or any politician for that matter is ridiculous. If we start judging politicians based on real world experience then 90% of them would be disqualified.
A part-time drama teacher is better than career politician in your mind to run the country?
A journalist with an expertise in Russian history is better than a career financial expert to run the economy?
Who will decide which work experience is acceptable? CEO of a larger company = Good? Worked full-time at Tim Hortons for 20 years =Bad? Where is your line?
This is what elections are for, if the candidate is not acceptable, don’t vote for them, it is that simple.
VPN ads drive me nuts...they claim to do everything to protect your online session and the average consumer is none the wiser.
We protect your banking and CC information (nope, that is https)
We anonymize your browsing session (browser)
We protect against viruses (really?)
We stop your ISP from seeing what you are doing (ok, but now your VPN provider knows)
We don't let web sites sniff through your cookies (how?)
I know it is all sales but it is all very shady.