@RandomRanger's banner p

RandomRanger

Just build nuclear plants!

2 followers   follows 1 user  
joined 2022 September 05 00:46:54 UTC

				

User ID: 317

RandomRanger

Just build nuclear plants!

2 followers   follows 1 user   joined 2022 September 05 00:46:54 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 317

Deepseek R1 and Project Stargate

A few days ago the Chinese AI firm Deepseek released their newest reasoning model, R1. It's very clever according to the benchmarks, roughly on par with OpenAI's O1 at a tiny fraction of the price. My subjective analysis is that it still feels slightly uncanny/unwise compared to Sonnet 3.5 but is also more capable in strategic thinking and not making stupid errors in mathematics. These models are spiky, good in some places and weak in others. Somehow these things can reason together hundreds of lines of code but can't reason simpler, spontaneous things like 'is special relativity relevant here?'. Deepseek R1 also has a totally different attitude to Sonnet, it will stand up for itself and argue with you on matters of interpretation and subjectivity rather than constantly flip-flopping to agree with you like a yesman's yesman. It's also quite a good writer, slop levels are falling fast.

OpenAI has O3 coming soon which should restore qualitative superiority for the US camp. However, Deepseek is still just a few months behind the leading US provider in quality. They're far ahead in compute-efficiency. The clowns at Facebook have far more GPUs, far more money and aren't hampered by sanctions... What have they been doing with their tens, hundreds of thousands of H100s? Deepseek also flexed on them, finetuning Facebook's Llama models into much more capable reasoners as the cherry on top of their R1. Now even local models can display strong maths skills.

At the same time, Deepseek founder Liang Wenfeng was seen with the Premier of China: https://x.com/teortaxesTex/status/1881375948773486646

It's hard to judge whether this is significant, Xi Xinping >>>> the next most influential man in China. Plus, premiers meet lots of people all the time. However, China does have lots of resources, they could probably encourage some of the less capable Chinese AI companies to hand over their compute to Deepseek. China spent hundreds of billions on semiconductor policy for Made in China 2025, they can easily give Deepseek access to real compute as opposed to a couple-thousand of export-grade Nvidia GPUs. Tencent has at least 50,000 H-series GPUs and hasn't done anything particularly exciting with them as far as I know. (I asked R1 and it pointed out that Tencent has also made their own smaller, cheaper, mildly better version of Lambda 405B that probably nobody in the West has ever heard of: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2411.02265).

However, OpenAI has just announced 'Project Stargate' - a $500 Billion dollar investment in AI compute capacity over the next four years for OpenAI alone. Microsoft, Oracle, Nvidia, ARM are all working together with Softbank and some others, with the US government looming behind them. To a certain extent this is just repackaging re-existing investment as something new. But it's hard to get more serious than a $500 billion dollar capital investment plan. This plan was announced at the White House and Trump smiles on it, he took the Aschenbrenner pill some time ago.

https://x.com/OpenAI/status/1881830103858172059

It's funny to hear Trump reading out this stuff in a complete monotone, like he's bored or sleepy. 500 billion dollar investment... meh, who cares? He does seem to like Altman though, thinks he's the biggest expert in AI. I suspect Altman has used his maxxed out corporate charisma on Trump as well: https://x.com/levie/status/1881838470429319235

Interestingly, there's another huge disparity between the two AI competitors. China enjoys complete dominance in electricity production and grid expansion. They doubled electricity output in 10 years, the US has been treading water. The US talks about a nuclear renaissance and is building 0 new reactors. China is building 29. It's a similar story in all other areas of power production, China produces roughly a Germany's worth of power production every single year. It's possible that Trump's 'drill baby drill' can change this but the US is starting from very far behind China in this part of the race.

https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/plans-for-new-reactors-worldwide

There are considerable power issues with Stargate, more gas and coal will be needed to bring it online. Also another perspective on Trump's 'energy emergency' as being about AI: https://x.com/energybants/status/1881860142108377412

I see a conflict between two paradigms - power rich, GPU-poor and hyper-talented China vs power-poor, GPU-rich and grimly determined USA.

Political relevance? Trump perks up for a moment: "We want it to be in this country, we want it to be in this country, China is a competitor, others are competitors..." Deepseek has a wildly different vision for AI, open-sourcing everything the moment they can. I don't need to quote the ridiculously benevolent-sounding interviews where they talk about the honour of open-source for engineers as a big part of their strategy - they've backed up talk with action.

I find it quite ironic that the censored, dictatorial Chinese are the bastions of open-source technology for the everyman while the democratic, liberty-loving Americans are plotting to monopolize the most powerful technology in history and shroud it in secrecy. I suppose that's another cultural difference between the West and China. We have been fixated upon the dangers of robotics and mechanization for 60 years if not longer. We have the Daleks, the Cybermen, Skynet, HAL, GLADOS, the Matrix, SHODAN, Ultron, M3gan and so much more that I've not even heard about. Our cultural ethos is that AI is supremely political and dangerous and important and must be considered very very very carefully. There are good AIs like Cortana but even Cortana goes rogue at points.

The Chinese have... a goofy meme robot with a cannon on its crotch. As far as I can see, that is the absolute closest thing they have to a malign robot/AI in their cultural sphere: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xianxingzhe

I think this may be relevant to how AI programs are developed and the mindset of AI development. Google, Facebook and Anthropic are all spending huge amounts of time and resources to be careful, making sure everything is safe and nontoxic, making sure they're genre-aware, carefully considering the worldshaping effects of the algorithm, ensuring the AIs can't escape and betray them. Someone in Google really wanted there to be black Vikings in this world and made it so in their image model. Whereas the people at Deepseek don't really care about politics beyond holding to the party line in the required areas, they go: 'don't be such a pussy, advance forwards with longtermism'.

Also I find it ironic that OpenAI is naming their gigacompute manhattan project after a

"Russian and Chinese military spending does the opposite" says the hippy "and all we get are these retarded wars and megadeaths that grind on for years where almost nobody gets what they want and everyone pays a shockingly high price. Why can't we all just get along?"

There are a bunch of complex reasons why we can't get along probably rooted in the human condition and likewise there are complex reasons why people want to speculate or do things that aren't strictly rational or productive. I feel no desire towards Bulgari handbags but I don't think 'these should be banned because they're socially useless moneysinks that unworthy organizations use to make money they shouldn't really have because they make these things high-status'. Let people enjoy things.

News of great import: https://x.com/0xRenaissance/status/1881085743336181974

If you look at the memecoin's price chart on its side, it looks a bit like Trump's face.

Yes but in 'theory' everyone could cut military spending to zero and not have to worry about being invaded. But that's obviously not practical.

Likewise banning crypto would be impractical for the same reason that banning stocks in the 18th century was also impractical. Speculation occurred. There were dangerous bubbles that caused serious economic problems. But there were advantages in having liquidity and a developed financial system. Crypto also performs various important functions that aren't fully understood by anyone right now, like stocks back then. Fast global transactions, cheap and secure storage of wealth, recordkeeping, smart contracts...

In the beginning, there was Robin Hanson's Overcoming Bias. Yud started Less Wrong as an offshoot of that. Scott posted there and was a big fan of Yud. Yud brought his ideas greater prominence with Methods of Rationality. Scott later branched away with SSC. At about that time there were a bunch of people on lesswrong dumping Yud's Enlightenment/rationality/AI-alarmism ethos for neo-reaction. That was basically the origin of the culture war thread, one of Scott's earliest big posts was about an anti-neoreactionary FAQ, that's where conventional politics came into play. Then of course there was 2016 and lots of people got more political...

So MoR is a sibling or uncle of SSC.

What's the book/article/comment that attracted you to the community in the first place?

Well there's no way of talking about any of this without bringing up Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality. People either love it or hate it but it is truly one of the stories of all time.

Hang on, the far-right want women pumping out children and raising them patriotically as good citizens of the nation. Hitler was very big on natalism, the whole point of the war was to acquire more land and increase the number of Germans in the world. The far left were among the first to conceive of birth strikes and were generally bearish on natalism.

Too much horseshoe, not enough 'different things are different'.

A good 2% of world GDP goes into negative sum, 'socially useless' military spending. Just because something is socially useless it doesn't follow that it's wise or practical to do away with it.

I was given Yuaval Noah Harari's book Nexus as a gift. It's quite relevant.

You can tell that a certain faction of 'Elite Human Capital' are working hard to find justifications for clampdowns on information. He constantly re-emphasises that truth is not necessarily as useful for creating and preserving social order as fiction, that naively propagating freedom of information can be a breeding ground for dangerous ideas. He apportions a good chunk of blame for Myanmar having a civil war on Facebook algorithms which strikes me as a gross simplification. He says that democratic means can achieve evil ends - Hitler was voted in. And maybe if the commies had modern AI technology it would be possible to run an economy centrally and thus achieve global totalitarianism. The answer to preserving our Correct Social Values of anti-racism, feminism and liberal democracy is unclear, who knows how to do it or what compromises will be made, Yuval says. But it is key to identify that freedom of speech and information is increasingly becoming unhelpful in this new environment and should not be a core value. There should be a conversation between people to achieve democratic governance but somehow the conversation needs to be managed to prevent bad outcomes by law and various institutional mechanisms. Managed Democracy.

I wouldn't mischaracterize the book as being invalid, it's more along the lines of 'here is a perfectly valid argument for why I (and people like me) should have more power and you should have less' which may indeed be perfectly valid but is still somewhat dubious, given the interests of those making the argument.

It doesn't specify. But it's not weak liquor.

Gas chambers got a bad rep. Also it's clownish and unbefitting.

More seriously, executions aren't complicated. It's pre-bronze age social technology. There's nothing in practical terms that makes it difficult or costly, it's a political and social construct to make them slow and expensive. Other people have different social constructs.

See what they do in Taiwan:

Executions are carried out by shooting using a handgun aimed at the heart from the back, or aimed at the brain stem under the ear if the prisoner had consented to organ donation prior to the withdrawal of legal death row organ donation.[27] The execution time used to be 5:00 a.m., but was changed to 9:00 p.m. in 1995 to reduce officials' workload. It was changed again to 7:30 p.m. in 2010.[28] Executions are performed in secret: nobody is informed beforehand, including the condemned. The condemned is brought to the execution range and the officers may pay respect to the statue of Ksitigarbha located outside the range before entering. Before the execution, the prisoner's identity is confirmed by a special court next to the execution range and chooses to record any last words. The prisoner is then brought to the execution range and served a last meal (which usually includes a bottle of kaoliang wine).[28] The condemned prisoner is then injected with strong anaesthetic to cause unconsciousness, laid flat on the ground, face down, and shot. The executioner then burns a votive bank note for the deceased before carrying away the corpse.[28] It is tradition for the condemned to place a NT$500 or 1000 banknote in his leg irons as a tip for the executioners.[28]

I was so disbelieving I checked the wikipedia source, apparently they really do tip the executioner (specifically the guys who take the shackles off the body after the shooting).

RationalWiki has to be one of the most cringeworthy sites around.

Everything is written with the kind of contemptuous, snarky tone that you see on the incels.wiki page for 'femoids'. At least the incels are succinct.

For instance, on the Vladimir Putin page for instance they have "Reality-defying good stuff?" and "And the reality-returning bad stuff" as sections. 'Elderly imperialist Elmer Fudd and Daniel Craig’s evil twin.' is not an appropriate subtitle for an image.

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/nvidia-and-sia-fire-back-at-u-s-govs-new-export-restrictions-on-ai-gpus-to-china

The US has formally decreed who gets GPUs and who doesn't. Here's a map:

https://x.com/AndrewCurran_/status/1877773878858047608

Tier 1: The U.S. and 18 allies (including Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, France, French Guiana, Ireland, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, South Korea, Sweden, Taiwan, and the U.K.) will have 'near-unrestricted access' to advanced AI processors developed in the U.S. That rule will apply provided they meet U.S. security requirements and do not install over 25% their processing capabilities outside of Tier 1 countries.

Tier 2 countries include Portugal, Poland, Ukraine, Singapore, the UAE... (understandable since the UAE and Singapore are generally thought to be leaking GPUs on to China). But it's a pretty big snub to Poland and Portugal IMO, they're in NATO. I guess Trump's disdain for American allies is not totally unique to him. In practice though, this doesn't mean that much since it's not like Poland will need tens of thousands of GPUs in the next two years. India is also in tier 2, though again they're not really organized enough to get very far anyway. I think Tier 2 is anyone who is considered untrustworthy (and who can afford to be snubbed). Poland won't stop licking America's boots so who cares what they think? Or perhaps they're distrusting of Eastern Europeans generally.

Tier 3 are the US's primary enemies, the usual suspects.

I doubt that in practice this will have much impact. China is already very good at siphoning away US-made GPUs or accessing them via the cloud and they also have their own GPU industry. Their GPUs are qualitatively inferior to Nvidia but there is nothing stopping them from dedicating all leading-edge wafer production to GPUs and just eating higher power costs in datacentres. China is not short on electrical power production. China's AI development speed depends primarily on the seriousness of the government and only secondarily on sanctions, there are many things they could do to speed things up. For instance, China could redirect compute resources to Deepseek who has tiny allocations of compute even by Chinese standards. They could mobilize tens of millions to provide annotated high quality data, or at least block US companies buying training data from them...

Everyone else is too far behind the curve to matter.

I don't know when it was posted, it does sound like after, but my general recollection is that Trump was not calling for an armed coup, he was constantly emphasising, before and after, that protestors needed to be peaceful.

Food for thought:

Trump post contemporary with Jan 6th: "The election was stolen, we all know that, it sucks... But you have to go home, we need peace, we need law and order, we can't play into their hands, we need peace".

https://x.com/bennyjohnson/status/1876325245243806027

These things are explicitly designed to prevent anyone accessing them without authorization, I think they're quite complex. In theory of course you can jailbreak them but the Ukrainians had trouble doing so. Do we really want a nuclear Ukraine, a nuclear Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan? Hey, the Baltics were part of the Union, a dozen warheads each? Armenia and Azerbaijan immediately went to war, did they deserve a few H-bombs to liven up the South Caucasus?

Some would probably fall into the hands of Chechen or other Islamist terrorists in the confusion of the 1990s. It's amazing that none did in real life. Moscow took Soviet debt and the permanent UN seat, they might as well have the nukes too and keep the command and control system that was set up working.

Photos taken seconds (months) before disaster: https://www.kqed.org/science/1994972/forest-service-halts-prescribed-burns-california-worth-risk

This week, the U.S. Forest Service directed its employees in California to stop prescribed burning “for the foreseeable future,” a directive that officials said is meant to preserve staff and equipment to fight wildfires if needed.

“I think the Forest Service is worried about the risk of something bad happening [with a prescribed burn]. And they’re willing to trade that risk — which they will be blamed for — for increased risks on wildfires,” Wara said. In the event of a wildfire, “if something bad happens, they’re much less likely to be blamed because they can point the finger at Mother Nature.”

You can only backburn at certain times of year. It worsens air quality. There are risks of it getting out of hand. But if you don't do it...

I too am making a game. I don't know a damn thing about product release or marketing. All I have is this tweet for a marketing strategy, it seems pretty sound to me: https://x.com/codyschneiderxx/status/1819790369166430275

They have permissive action links though, nukes are unlike other weapons in that they don't 'just work'. Only decisionmakers in Moscow could fire them (otherwise any rogue commander could go and write Dr Strangelove fanfiction in the history books).

Fires in California seem really bad - Mandate of Heaven in danger?

Let me just preface this in that I'm not American so I don't fully really appreciate what it's like over there or how systems are supposed to work. Anyway, when we have fires in Australia, it exclusively impacts rural areas right next to woodland. Rich people tend to live closer to the cities in inner suburbs, near the sea. It's unthinkable that a fire reaches them, it'd have to burn through huge swathes of suburban sprawl first. All that happens for most Australians (and especially rich Australians) is that air quality gets horrendously bad for two weeks. Of course the state still tries very hard to protect homes but it's very much a rural issue, the rural fire service goes out to volunteer and firefight.

I'm reading that in Los Angeles, it's the opposite. Rich people live on the edge of the city, right next to woodland. You've got expensive houses burning down.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cg525q2ggl4o

There are pretty serious complaints about political neglect too. I hear that the mayor of LA was off in Ghana (which is frankly bizarre, this whole subnational diplomacy meme needs to be put down and buried in the backyard). I hear that the LA fire hydrants are somehow out of water in the Palisades. There have also been allegations that homeless people were lighting fires, I haven't seen any proof of this. TBH fire-lighting seems like very low-risk, high-return terrorism, it's astonishing we haven't seen it become more common in certain vulnerable countries.

Naturally the first have turned into a political issue. Anti-Trump people have started blaming climate change and arguing that Trump wanted to cut fire defence spending.

Pro Trump people have pointed out that Trump was critical of California's water infrastructure before. And it's not as though California is known for being run by legions of Trump toadies: https://x.com/greg_price11/status/1877055198604017790

There also seems to be dysfunction in insurance, a very high number of fire insurance plans were cancelled right before the fire (possibly due to regulations preventing rate rises): https://x.com/jeremykauffman/status/1877128641802285064

IMO the solution is intensive backburning when it's cool. There can be no fires if you destroy the fuel beforehand.

However, it does seem like a major failure in state legitimacy if you can't even protect the rich from fires. From Chris Bakke on twitter:

The situation in Pacific Palisades is devastating, heartbreaking, and is also the most “California” thing to happen in California.

The homes burning down are $5M+ homes in neighborhoods surrounded by 1000s of other $5M+ homes.

Owning a $5M house in CA means you pay about $60,000 per year in property taxes.

So you and thousands of your neighbors all pay $60,000 or $80,000 or $120,000, or way more in property taxes every year.

And when a wildfire comes down the hill toward your neighborhood, the firefighters show up and there’s no water in the fire hydrants.

Never change, California.

Thoughts? I don't really have a thesis here.

I can see you put lots of thought into this. I'm not one of those people who holds the secrets of the universe in terms of aviation... I sense you have some expertise here, not everyone knows what NATOPs is.

But I still find myself thinking 'if three loyal wingman are good, a swarm of four should be better (and without the vulnerability and expense of the manned fighter)'. Flying a fighter jet is hard work, especially if you're managing all this tech in addition to your usual workload. You might have a weapons officer devoted just to managing the swarm. And then who is doing the ECM and other duties?

Can't we program AI pilots to not destroy the aircraft in flight? Isn't that what fly-by-wire does? Can't we program an AI to go 'if the situation is desperate give it a go, burn out those engines to scrape out a victory'? Or use the gun in an aggressive way that a human surely wouldn't have the precision reflexes for? AI doesn't neccessarily have to be an ultra-rule-abiding automaton stuck with orthodox tactics, as you point out it can also be a risktaker daredevil ready to sacrifice to get the mission done. It will be whatever we program it to be.

And sure, using the gun is unlikely. But if the goal is flinging missiles at long range and then dodging the missile coming back at you, that seems like a job for a machine. Faster turns, perhaps accelerating in directions that are particularly dangerous for humans.

Imagine if all the instruments in the cockpit were gone, if the blazingly high-tech helmets didn't even need to exist. No need for air pressurization, no need for this big circular space and glass canopy in the aircraft. It could be super-thin or superior in some design respects without having the trade-off of having a cockpit. Lower complexity.

Imagine if the maintenance costs on these fighters were dramatically cut because the pilots didn't need to keep up flight hours. That's a huge saving. No trainer aircraft!

Maybe you could use less reliable engines, crank out airframes that aren't expected to last 20 years because they don't constantly need to be flown to train the pilots. We could have the T-34 1942 of aircraft, a reign of quantity. As far as I can see, Loyal Wingmen cost 1/3 or 1/4 as much as a manned fighter over the whole lifetime. So going from 4 manned fighters to 12 unmanned isn't that unreasonable. You might say their capabilities are inferior but the F-35 somehow has a shorter range than a significantly shorter MQ-28, there are swings and roundabouts.

And why the hell are civilian planes flying over airspace where there are two airforces slugging it out? I can see the issue here but you could make an AI subroutine that assesses 'is this really a civilian aircraft - judging speed, radar imagery, size, IR and visual evidence? Is it dumping flares? Is it shrouding a smaller drone?' You could customize the AI's defcon level depending on the mission, so to speak. Anyway, civilian aircraft get shot down all the time by air defences, accidents happen. I don't know what was going on in Azerbaijan or in Yemen, where the US was shooting at their own plane. Perhaps the software was to blame, perhaps it was human error. I don't see how there's a significant edge there for human systems, they're plenty fallible.

I agree completely with what you predict is happening, the new Chinese jet looks rather like a rear-line combat aircraft. Maybe that's where NGAD is heading too. Loyal Wingmen are great. But why not move faster?

Interesting points. In the back of my mind I was thinking that maybe AI aircraft would be more tactically flexible since you can change up their training in a quick update though I can see how it would also be bad if you had software leaks. But the F-35 software has already been leaked to China half a dozen times, they even have gotten some Chinese made parts into the supply chain.

Also one hopes that they'd put visual cameras on the plane. They already do I think, F-35 pilots have AR that lets them see through the plane I believe.

Even then, I still expect that the unmanned aircraft's advantages in price, quality and scale would be enormous. It wouldn't be 4 fighters going out on that mission, you could have 12 or 16 because training fighter pilots is inherently costly and slow. You would have smaller, faster and more agile aircraft, without human limitations. Whatever crazy dodging a human could do, the machine would easily surpass in terms of g-forces. Each fighter would have the crushing reflexes of a machine and that ruthless, ultra-honed AlphaGo edge of having spent a trillion hours in simulation evolving superior kills.

You could afford to lose those jets on risky missions - even suicide missions if you decided the gains were worth it.

Leftists of course do not care about those girls getting raped and deflect the accusations outright by denying that the rapes happened in the first place.

They do care but only marginally. I was in a discussion just recently. A quasi steelman of their position (copperman?) is that yes, rapes may have happened and political correctness may have contributed to the police failing. HOWEVER, Elon Musk is just bringing up this against Keir for political reasons. The people who bring this up have an agenda, they're motivated and they won't give you the full context. If you have the full context you'd probably find it's a very murky situation and there are no clear goodies and baddies. By the way, you can't find the full context because there's nobody who's disinterested in this so don't even try (also I can't be bothered to look into this, it's not my problem). Every big prosecutor has 10 cases out of 3000 that look pretty bad, Elon is just singling out Keir because he can. What are you supposed to do, get it right every time?

Furthermore, judges frequently let out criminals they thought were truly guilty because that's how the law works (judge says 'I wouldn't say frequently' in reply). Anyway, it was a breakdown in communications, these things just slip through the cracks, it wouldn't be fair to hold anyone accountable for it. Police corruption and institutional failure does sometimes happen but we should be very wary of people who say the police are covering it up or that the authorities have failed us because that's what far-right people and schizos say. Most people who say this are schizos or liars. And there were all these times people were arrested for pedophilia despite not being pedophiles because the wrong people were listened to...

TLDR; rule of law > catching pedophiles and taking them out of circulation. Elon and the far-right are in the wrong here.

Perhaps you can tell from my tone that I don't really agree with this, I find the argument motivated to be maximally unfalsifiable. You could use this kind of reasoning to justify everything, there's a kind of meta-cherrypicking going on: "you can't just pick out bad things politicians have done in the past to attack them in the present when everyone makes mistakes" surely wouldn't be accepted for the wrongdoings of Donald Trump. My conclusion is that IQ once again isn't an unalloyed good. You can use intelligence to achieve any goal, good or ill.

I'm not singling you out here because I hear this a lot and I wonder... what is it that pilots do that an AI can't that compensates for the training expense and kinematics costs of having a pilot? The pilot can't do damage-control on the plane mid-flight. They don't pick out targets, the sensors achieve lock on. They're not tactically superior, that's been proven with dogfighting simulations even between equally performing jets. It's all fly-by-wire these days, their muscles aren't necessary.

I guess a human might be better at the ethics of 'do we bomb this truck or not, given how close it is to civilians?' But again humans have high variance and it's not clear that this is so.

That's exactly what the F-35 was supposed to be, only it turned into another super-expensive fighter which needs the F-15 EX to handle more everyday missions...