On one hand I don’t mind the government keeping corporations in check. On the other, the government doing business via random threats and bullying seems worse than corporations.
That's the thing though, he has $600M dollars worth of reasons to bend.
People think that money makes you strong, maybe it does but only upto like a couple million dollars if at all, well whatever amount will give you a lifetime of comfortable life, after that it's all about how to preserve or make more money.
The more you have the more reason you have to do the wrong thing.
To me, this is a confirmation of how much of a free man I am and how unfree these tech billionaires and CEOs are. Because I can choose to say AI, whereas they seemingly cannot.
I would expect people selling AI to like that term for marketing reasons, completely independent of their opinion of the person who provided a crystallization point to organize the terminology change around.
Super Intelligence is a term of art that has been around for a few decades now. Nick Bostrom gave a the canonical definition for it almost 30 years ago. Super Intelligence is more relevant to the concerns articulated in this article than AI which is rather broad in its purview. Maybe this is Trump stuff? I don't know. If it were something stupid like Freedom Intelligence then I'd be pretty annoyed, but there is a lot of plausible deniability that Super Intelligence is just a better term for what we're all freaking out about. A world where GPT 4 hits scaling limits and it costs $500 a month to run is definitely AI but none of the catastrophes emerge at that level of intelligence. That would actually be a pretty sweet world. But now we get to have our whole civilization ground up into dust by super intelligence instead.
True, but for Bostrom Superintelligence was a capability level for AI and not a replacement for the accepted scientific term. Narrow -> General -> Super.
600M is not that much actually, just three proper celebrity houses in LA or sth… he’s still poor-man to run a trillion dollar company. SteveB had better deal out that responsibility.
He wouldn't have this net worth if he ever had a spine. Mind you, he's very tough to people under him, and that's a very important characteristic of this kind of people, but he really doesn't have a spine.
My AI is regularly solving master's thesis level, and sometimes Ph.D thesis level problems for the purpose of, e.g. routine tasks like filling out random paperwork.
It's been very odd.
I'd only assume Nadella has access to more advanced models than I do, just as much as I have more advanced models than my relatives.
I feel like I'm missing some context. A lot of context.
Whose loyalty test? How?
I mostly heard "super intelligence" a long, long time ago in the context of work on AI / philosophy / futurism which, honestly, sounded pretty detached until the current deep learning sprint, and now sounds pretty prophetic.
Right, and humiliation rituals are not just about the authoritarian's ego, they do damage that the authoritarian exploits.
People who comply scar their reputation and trustworthiness, so that it's harder for them to build any alliance against the authoritarian in the future, ex: "We all know Bob lied to keep his job... But if they threaten his job again, doesn't that mean he might lie to us too?"
Should I then assume that Copilot is "compromised", and given that they've shoehorned it into all Microsoft products, then, by extension, that means all Microsoft products are compromised?
This just feels like more of the war on local models. I expect to see a lot more FUD about this as hyperscalers desperately try to push the message that local models are incapable to keep people on the teat.
Rich people in general have this belief, that they somehow got there by objective means and via their superior intellect. I just watched an interview the other day that someone posted where Sam Altman described using a notebook (yes literally pencil and paper) but was describing it as if he had discovered fire. These people are literally blinded by their money.
Yeah, after having a meeting at the Oval office, it's for sure everyone got taught by our bro "Dario" regarding containing things as the Chinese are catching up.
Give this a break...
Here's a video of Nadella speaking about AI a year ago.
I couldn't for the life of me understand him, it sounded like when someone I know did cocaine and spent like 8 hours per day with ChatGPT and developed their own internal vocabulary, right around peak AI psychosis era with 4o as well.
One thing you can hear is that he was super excited about AI, which is very obvious by how Copilot was slapped everywhere. And now that the market is expressing their backlash about AI they are just hopping on the bandwagon.
But I remember, and I think the MSFT customers will remember how AI was slapped into everything INCLUDING NOTEPAD.EXE
I don't get why using “super intelligence” is an issue here. It seems the US admin sort of politicized this and now US companies have their own reasons for selecting terms that may not make sense to people who aren't making the same decisions.
Everything else seems reasonable? Assume the worst and put the controls in place to handle that scenario? Isn't this how we approach security normally?
NOTE: NOT a security expert, so I may be talking out of my...
Because it's creepy and Orwellian, not to mention hypocritical (MAGA is supposed to hate thought policing). Do you like people telling you what words you can and cannot use?
> Unfortunately, Nadella also refers to AI as “super intelligence” throughout the post.
What's the deal with these clowns? Nadella's estimated net worth is like $600M. Is that still not enough for him to buy himself a spine?
At 600M, if keeping a spine has a risk of slight reduction in that wealth, then the spine is thrown out in a jiffy.
No rich man or woman is a friend of society.
That is why governments fear revolt from the poor. They have nothing more to lose.
Not having a spine goes a long way when you're trying to make billions.
If he stands up to Trump, Trump declares Microsoft a national security threat and decimates the company. That’s what this is about.
On one hand I don’t mind the government keeping corporations in check. On the other, the government doing business via random threats and bullying seems worse than corporations.
That's the thing though, he has $600M dollars worth of reasons to bend.
People think that money makes you strong, maybe it does but only upto like a couple million dollars if at all, well whatever amount will give you a lifetime of comfortable life, after that it's all about how to preserve or make more money.
The more you have the more reason you have to do the wrong thing.
No he's an automaton optimizing for status
Otherwise suddenly MS is excluded from government contracts (even ones awarded or in progress), justice department will start attacking it etc.
its not actually 600M dollars, just promises and notes
the second he tries to cash out even a fraction of that, it'll start becoming worth less and less
To me, this is a confirmation of how much of a free man I am and how unfree these tech billionaires and CEOs are. Because I can choose to say AI, whereas they seemingly cannot.
I would expect people selling AI to like that term for marketing reasons, completely independent of their opinion of the person who provided a crystallization point to organize the terminology change around.
You assume he’s a human and not a super intelligent being himself
I am pretty sure he's not super intelligent.
He has to keep The Orange House happy.
ELI5 why he needs to please the Dutch royal family?
The Orange House, not the House of Orange.
See also: Peoples’ Front of Judea vs Judean Peoples Front.
Super Intelligence is a term of art that has been around for a few decades now. Nick Bostrom gave a the canonical definition for it almost 30 years ago. Super Intelligence is more relevant to the concerns articulated in this article than AI which is rather broad in its purview. Maybe this is Trump stuff? I don't know. If it were something stupid like Freedom Intelligence then I'd be pretty annoyed, but there is a lot of plausible deniability that Super Intelligence is just a better term for what we're all freaking out about. A world where GPT 4 hits scaling limits and it costs $500 a month to run is definitely AI but none of the catastrophes emerge at that level of intelligence. That would actually be a pretty sweet world. But now we get to have our whole civilization ground up into dust by super intelligence instead.
True, but for Bostrom Superintelligence was a capability level for AI and not a replacement for the accepted scientific term. Narrow -> General -> Super.
Stop being obtuse, it’s clearly Trump’s hand up in his ass. No one’s used "super intelligence" before
600M is not that much actually, just three proper celebrity houses in LA or sth… he’s still poor-man to run a trillion dollar company. SteveB had better deal out that responsibility.
Was also wondering. Sounds low. Forbes puts him around 1.4B. Still lowish compared to his CEO peers. https://www.forbes.com/profile/satya-nadella/
Actual Indians > Super Indians
He wouldn't have this net worth if he ever had a spine. Mind you, he's very tough to people under him, and that's a very important characteristic of this kind of people, but he really doesn't have a spine.
the spine here is going with a deeply unpopular guy's dumb opinions and getting the hate mail
His own net worth isn’t the point.
Bend the knee or Trump will destroy your company. And every Republican in Congress is cool with that.
I don't quite see the problem here.
My AI is regularly solving master's thesis level, and sometimes Ph.D thesis level problems for the purpose of, e.g. routine tasks like filling out random paperwork.
It's been very odd.
I'd only assume Nadella has access to more advanced models than I do, just as much as I have more advanced models than my relatives.
Can you ask your AI to answer the ultimate question, that being the answer to life, the universe, and everything?
I hadn't tried that question before. Gemini knew the answer.
Because it's a political loyalty test. Nobody started using it organically until they were ordered to in order to prove their loyalty.
Using it is embarrassing.
I feel like I'm missing some context. A lot of context.
Whose loyalty test? How?
I mostly heard "super intelligence" a long, long time ago in the context of work on AI / philosophy / futurism which, honestly, sounded pretty detached until the current deep learning sprint, and now sounds pretty prophetic.
You missed yesterday's edict? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50019684
Wait, the renaming was from a speech on 11 September in fact, I lost track.
Yes, I did miss it.
Thank you.
That sucks. It's a helpful term. Now, it's politicized.
It's a bit more than a mere loyalty test, in that Trump knows it is humiliating for them to listen to him on anything like this.
He knows humiliation (from his father and from Putin) and he loves to dish it out to others.
This is Reek, basically.
Right, and humiliation rituals are not just about the authoritarian's ego, they do damage that the authoritarian exploits.
People who comply scar their reputation and trustworthiness, so that it's harder for them to build any alliance against the authoritarian in the future, ex: "We all know Bob lied to keep his job... But if they threaten his job again, doesn't that mean he might lie to us too?"
Should I then assume that Copilot is "compromised", and given that they've shoehorned it into all Microsoft products, then, by extension, that means all Microsoft products are compromised?
No change there.
https://wallhop.io/https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-in...
(wallhop is a 12ft.io alternative I noticed on hn earlier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50038634 )
Well of course.
If you blindly assume it works and it doesn't, that's a problem.
If your process can handle it not working, it's much less of a problem.
This just feels like more of the war on local models. I expect to see a lot more FUD about this as hyperscalers desperately try to push the message that local models are incapable to keep people on the teat.
Someone will vibe-code Office and Windows, and he knows it.
Didn't someone vibe code Photoshop this week?
Maybe I am living in a bubble, but no company I have worked at in the past 15 years has cared in the least about either Windows or Office.
> More advanced models will require more advanced containment technologies that we need to standardize on.
How about yanking the cords, or maybe a big red “shutdown” button
so the grapes are sour for some after all
Once again, why do all these CEOs think they are thought leaders all of a sudden?
Basis - in short: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uwfOWYchpI
Rich people in general have this belief, that they somehow got there by objective means and via their superior intellect. I just watched an interview the other day that someone posted where Sam Altman described using a notebook (yes literally pencil and paper) but was describing it as if he had discovered fire. These people are literally blinded by their money.
Yeah, after having a meeting at the Oval office, it's for sure everyone got taught by our bro "Dario" regarding containing things as the Chinese are catching up. Give this a break...
I was expecting he was going to finally acknowledge these are trained on CSAM, been compromised and used to perpetuate abusive crimes.
Here's a video of Nadella speaking about AI a year ago.
I couldn't for the life of me understand him, it sounded like when someone I know did cocaine and spent like 8 hours per day with ChatGPT and developed their own internal vocabulary, right around peak AI psychosis era with 4o as well.
One thing you can hear is that he was super excited about AI, which is very obvious by how Copilot was slapped everywhere. And now that the market is expressing their backlash about AI they are just hopping on the bandwagon.
But I remember, and I think the MSFT customers will remember how AI was slapped into everything INCLUDING NOTEPAD.EXE
[flagged]
Source: https://twitter.com/satyanadella/status/2108931348857827686 (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50035193)
[dead]
[flagged]
I don't get why using “super intelligence” is an issue here. It seems the US admin sort of politicized this and now US companies have their own reasons for selecting terms that may not make sense to people who aren't making the same decisions.
Everything else seems reasonable? Assume the worst and put the controls in place to handle that scenario? Isn't this how we approach security normally?
NOTE: NOT a security expert, so I may be talking out of my...
Because it's creepy and Orwellian, not to mention hypocritical (MAGA is supposed to hate thought policing). Do you like people telling you what words you can and cannot use?
Because literally one person came up with that term, just to put their own stamp on it.
Not just to put their own stamp on it. To force others to use it.
Naming it is taking credit for it. “No one’s done as much for tech as me!”
Forcing others to use it is just par for the course with this administration
It is a loyalty test, of the type favoured by dictators, emperors, and heads of mafia families everywhere.
America is lost.
I assume he's referring to the long-standing Microsoft engineering principles of "zero trust": https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/security/zero-trust/zero-t...
and "least privilege": https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/entra/identity-platform/se...
Microsoft didn't invent either of those concepts. They are long standing security principles. Especially least privilege.
Microsoft invented those principles when they added UAC to Windows Vista. Also, Al Gore invented the Internet.
didn't say they invented them.. I'm just saying they follow them rather dogmatically.