nausea_4life

[nausea_4life @nausea_4life]

@MarhelmData my hamster

[nausea_4life @nausea_4life]

@war_cube excellent work cube man

[nausea_4life @nausea_4life]

@thekriskay relax. down first. let september end

[nausea_4life @nausea_4life]

@spotgamma sometimes there is a reason things are cheap.
but thanks hoss

[nausea_4life @nausea_4life]

@BankUnlimited tom is buying again

[محمدباقر قالیباف | MB Ghalibaf @mb_ghalibaf]

Wheels up. Warm-ups before liftoff:

Diesel ATH: Short it

Your biggest creditor dumping: Good luck with Yentervention++

NOR cutting $80B: Rename Norway to Americaway

Low recruitment: Debt-to-Service w/ DO[Israel's]W, per your puppeteers

Oh. Fed's dot plot flashing red 😁

[Steve Hou @stevehou]

Terrence Tao’s reaction to the potential news of a frontier AI model solving a hard mathematical proof problem is potentially also very instructive for the question of ROI from AI.

A problem that’s very valuable for a human to solve with human reasoning that comes with the attendant insights and motivation for future problem-solving may not be as valuable if it were solved by a machine, esp the value of the technical solution of the problem doesn’t entirely lie in the destination as much as the process.

An Anthropic model may well have solved the Navier-Strokes problem as posed on the Clay challenges acc to @AndrewCurran_. But it’s far from clear that it has high economic returns except in demonstrating the raw power in solving a hard unbounded task.

At some point rather than being satisfied with being given hints or analogies for the power to do extraordinarily valuable creative things, people may start demanding to see the models to just do extraordinarily valuable creative things already.

[Hedgie @HedgieMarkets]

🦔AI can only fix security vulnerabilities 26% of the time. Researchers at 1Password ran over 6,000 AI-generated patches using Claude and ChatGPT against real vulnerabilities. Half the time the AI failed to fix the original bug. 4.5% of the time it created a brand new vulnerability that didn't exist before. And the researchers found that checking an AI-generated security patch takes more effort than just writing the fix yourself.
Their conclusion was blunt. "The expected value of a fully LLM-generated, non-human-reviewed patch is a net-negative by a considerable margin."

My Take
OpenAI launched a program this summer called "Patch the Planet" where AI finds bugs and generates the fixes. These researchers ran 270 patches against one of those same bugs. Zero clean fixes. Not one. Every patch that fixed the original problem created a new vulnerability in the process. The partner that submitted a fix through OpenAI's program produced what the researchers classified as the worst possible outcome, it didn't fully fix the bug and it introduced a new exploit on top of it.

Here's what this means if you don't write code for a living. Companies are using these AI tools to patch the software that runs your bank, your hospital, your phone. The pitch has been "AI finds and fixes security holes faster than humans." This study says the AI fix is four times more likely to be broken than working, and a third of the time it recreates the exact same mistakes human programmers already made. Reviewing the AI's work takes longer than doing it yourself. So the speed advantage disappears the moment you try to verify the output, which most companies won't do because the entire point was to move faster. I think we're going to see major breaches traced back to AI-generated patches that nobody checked, and the companies that shipped them are going to blame the tool instead of the decision to trust it.

Hedgie🤗

Study: https://t.co/5b9FQRBMSX

[nausea_4life @nausea_4life]

@MoloWarMonitor so youre saying there could be a major shift but you say its rumours? fuck your engagement bullshit, unfollowed

[VIKTOR @thedefivillain]

Dawg, if you want to do an adult summer camp, then it means it's time to have kids

[MidCurveCapital @midwit_capital]

"Net, net I’m not that concerned about the widening spreads in hyperscale credit."

[nausea_4life @nausea_4life]

https://t.co/zwM3jwVWoU

[Alan MacLeod @AlanRMacLeod]

What stage of capitalism is this?

[nausea_4life @nausea_4life]

@RosenvoldGeo they arguably dont have "unleashing hell" on the table. GCC will resist.
controlled demolition of hormuz-relevant targets to make it easier escorting through the Omani lane + blockade and then sit it out. but then he will get impeached unless he can somehow cheat the midterms.

[nausea_4life @nausea_4life]

https://t.co/QjNnpszlCr

[nausea_4life @nausea_4life]

https://t.co/yZPF9FBRMF

[Kuppy @hkuppy]

What stage of the AI bubble is this…??

[No context Hazz ⛩ @HazzimIO]

No comments.

[Jen Horsburgh @jenatlionra]

I just wanted to update my resume. Instead, I accidentally proved how a multi-billion-dollar AI tool hallucinates a glass ceiling for women.

I changed a single variable: My name.

Here is what happened when "Jennifer" became "Jeff."

[nausea_4life @nausea_4life]

@war_cube bakhmut was the last 'verdun' of the 21st century.
welcome to the drone age