China and the US Say They've Agreed to Start Talks About AI (cnn.com) 167
The United States and China have agreed to "launch a dialogue" on AI, reports Reuters.
On artificial intelligence, the two sides agreed to hold a dialogue on the technology's risks and benefits, with the next round of discussions set for November, and to set up a communication channel for AI-related incidents, the Chinese Foreign Ministry and the White House said.
The White House said that the leaders had agreed to use the term "super intelligence" in place of "artificial intelligence." In a separate statement, the Chinese ministry said that Beijing valued Washington's use of the new term. As AI technology continues to advance, the two sides should step up exchanges and work toward consensus in line with new developments, it said.
But CNN argues that "Despite growing calls to prevent AI development from spiraling out of control, the Trump-Xi summit has produced little substance, as many experts expected." The right thing to do on AI, [China's leader] Xi said during talks with Trump, is to "draw on each other's strengths, not guard against each other" — a reference to Beijing's concern about US containment, from existing tech export controls to potential AI restrictions. "The two sides can continue their dialogue on AI, exchange views on its risks and benefits, and jointly prevent the misuse and abuse of AI," he added. But the summit has yielded little progress on AI beyond a formal dialogue and a bilateral communication channel, proposals discussed before the two leaders' summit — underscoring the entrenched mutual mistrust amid contrasting visions on AI... Because of low levels of trust, cooperation between the two superpowers remains limited, said George Chen, chair of digital practice at The Asia Group consultancy. "Beijing continues to believe Washington seeks to contain China's rise in AI and other emerging technologies, a perception that will shape the pace and scope of future engagement for the two countries on AI," he said.
CNN also points out that while China trails the US in frontier AI models, "it's rapidly narrowing the technology gap while championing a more open ecosystem centered on accessibility and lower cost." In July, Chinese leader Xi Jinping launched the World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organization — a rival grouping to the Pax Silica alliance that Trump formed last year to reduce reliance on China for AI supply chains. While over two dozen countries and the European Union signed up to Trump's Pax Silica, Xi has recruited 29 countries, including Russia, Indonesia and Pakistan, to his alternative vision of open models, which allow users to freely download, customize and run without paying hefty fees to American firms like Anthropic and OpenAI. For developers in the Global South, an inexpensive Chinese model from DeepSeek or Moonshot may be more useful than a slightly more capable system requiring an expensive subscription and access to a foreign cloud provider, said Eric Olander, editor in chief of The China-Global South Project, a research agency....
China's embrace of open systems has not always been a top-down strategy by Beijing. Restrictions on access to the most advanced chips because of US export controls, coupled with smaller capital markets, have pushed Chinese developers toward open models as a way to compete with leading US proprietary systems. That shift has proved effective. In a year, Chinese models' global usage skyrocketed from less than 15% to over 54% last week, led by DeepSeek, according to AI leaderboard data by OpenRouter, a marketplace for models. Even American firms, from Airbnb and DoorDash to Shopify, have embraced Chinese models, tapping into the advantages of open systems, including lower costs and greater flexibility for customization.
CNN adds this insight from Alex Colville, an analyst focusing on tech and security at the government-backed Australian Strategic Policy Institute. "The more capable Chinese models become, the less likely it is Beijing may leave them unrestricted."
The White House said that the leaders had agreed to use the term "super intelligence" in place of "artificial intelligence." In a separate statement, the Chinese ministry said that Beijing valued Washington's use of the new term. As AI technology continues to advance, the two sides should step up exchanges and work toward consensus in line with new developments, it said.
But CNN argues that "Despite growing calls to prevent AI development from spiraling out of control, the Trump-Xi summit has produced little substance, as many experts expected." The right thing to do on AI, [China's leader] Xi said during talks with Trump, is to "draw on each other's strengths, not guard against each other" — a reference to Beijing's concern about US containment, from existing tech export controls to potential AI restrictions. "The two sides can continue their dialogue on AI, exchange views on its risks and benefits, and jointly prevent the misuse and abuse of AI," he added. But the summit has yielded little progress on AI beyond a formal dialogue and a bilateral communication channel, proposals discussed before the two leaders' summit — underscoring the entrenched mutual mistrust amid contrasting visions on AI... Because of low levels of trust, cooperation between the two superpowers remains limited, said George Chen, chair of digital practice at The Asia Group consultancy. "Beijing continues to believe Washington seeks to contain China's rise in AI and other emerging technologies, a perception that will shape the pace and scope of future engagement for the two countries on AI," he said.
CNN also points out that while China trails the US in frontier AI models, "it's rapidly narrowing the technology gap while championing a more open ecosystem centered on accessibility and lower cost." In July, Chinese leader Xi Jinping launched the World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organization — a rival grouping to the Pax Silica alliance that Trump formed last year to reduce reliance on China for AI supply chains. While over two dozen countries and the European Union signed up to Trump's Pax Silica, Xi has recruited 29 countries, including Russia, Indonesia and Pakistan, to his alternative vision of open models, which allow users to freely download, customize and run without paying hefty fees to American firms like Anthropic and OpenAI. For developers in the Global South, an inexpensive Chinese model from DeepSeek or Moonshot may be more useful than a slightly more capable system requiring an expensive subscription and access to a foreign cloud provider, said Eric Olander, editor in chief of The China-Global South Project, a research agency....
China's embrace of open systems has not always been a top-down strategy by Beijing. Restrictions on access to the most advanced chips because of US export controls, coupled with smaller capital markets, have pushed Chinese developers toward open models as a way to compete with leading US proprietary systems. That shift has proved effective. In a year, Chinese models' global usage skyrocketed from less than 15% to over 54% last week, led by DeepSeek, according to AI leaderboard data by OpenRouter, a marketplace for models. Even American firms, from Airbnb and DoorDash to Shopify, have embraced Chinese models, tapping into the advantages of open systems, including lower costs and greater flexibility for customization.
CNN adds this insight from Alex Colville, an analyst focusing on tech and security at the government-backed Australian Strategic Policy Institute. "The more capable Chinese models become, the less likely it is Beijing may leave them unrestricted."
I'm so relieved (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The problem for the trumpistani is that the whole "amurrikah prosperity" myth lies on the "AI" bubble and China is deflating it nicely by releasing high quality free and open models that run no worse than the "frontier" ones and on a very modest hardware.
It is a win for anyone who can use the models for what they are good for without subsidizing the moronic push of cuckerberg, slopman, dario sicutdei and the fat Nazi for producing a mechanistic god that will make them all-powerful and long lived.
Cool and no
Chinese AI hallucinates more (Score:1)
Really? Yesterday, as a test, I asked different AI models (CoPilot, Gemini, Brave Leo/Qwen, Venice AI) what they thought about Trump's rebranding of Artificial Intelligence as "Super Intelligence". All of the others pointed out that Super Intelligence is a term that already exists for a class of intelligence, but Qwen, which is a Chinese model, told me that Trump was not the current president of the US. Gave me my first AI hallucination
The claim about Chinese AI being superior or even competitive is hi
Re:Chinese AI hallucinates more (Score:5, Insightful)
How very strange.
Here's a screenshot of my session with my local Quentin 3.8 27B answering the same questions just now.
https://imgur.com/sVDycms [imgur.com]
Seems like you're either lying or not really skillful using those tools for trivial questions.
Re: (Score:2)
FWIW, this is the hugging face card of the model that generated the response above.
https://huggingface.co/unsloth... [huggingface.co]
Re: (Score:3)
One comment on that screenshot. Your AI said that it fetched a Wikipedia page from the Internet Archive because Wikipedia blocked it, if I understood it.
Kind of a dick move. Wikipedia has clearly indicated that it doesn't want your AI using it as a resource, and so has the Internet Archive. IA in particular is a non profit and their servers are melting in the inferno of all these AI queries right now.
Re: (Score:3)
Wikipedia actually works fine, they just ask you to send a unique user agent header and have a very generous restrictions policy for a single user.
The LLM I think fetched the article about trump's comment from the "internet archive" because the article website blocked it. It chose to use the simple fetch tool and I send whatever UA string the library has, so they assume it was a scraper bot or something. Besides, more and more websites put cloudflare and give you captcha shit instead of information if you
Re: (Score:2)
I think you miss the mark of true genius, as Hardy would say about some famous Ramanujan's astonishing 'result', that it may be wrong, but was still right in a deeper sense
Re: Chinese AI hallucinates more (Score:2)
Try asking it what day it is today, or tomorrow...
I use qwen frequently, and that is the thing it gets wrong most often (AFAIK), or similar, like when it says, next Monday, the 29th...ie can't even check its dates on a calendar ðY
Of course, like the western AIs, qwen also doesn't work in mainland China - not supported. It has a m/l specific version, of course, but, for me, at least, I wanted one that works everywhere.
Maybe I'll test Kimi on this...but I guess this whole AI technology is segregated. Sig
Re: (Score:2)
LOL, really now?
https://imgur.com/a/O6OIb1z [imgur.com]
Here is the model used, as you can observe, it isn't "uncensored", "ablated" or whatever, just an 8-bit quanitzed version of the original.
https://huggingface.co/unsloth... [huggingface.co]
It answers are quite close to what you'd expect from a Western model. Here is, for example, Google's Gemini answering exactly the same question:
https://imgur.com/a/MoJfxLM [imgur.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Strait of Hormuz flows are hovering at ~13-14 million barrels a day (7-day average). That's about the same as the brief peak in July. But with two notable difference: a) Iranian flows are zero (rather than ~2m b/d); b) all flows are fresh loadings, rather than pre-loaded tankers.
Ask your AI to confirm or deny...
A more interesting question, for the domestic model released inside China, about the "1989 Tiananmen Square protests and massacre"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
What the international model release to the west says is less interesting.
Re: (Score:2)
Nice goalpost shift from your initial claim, and answering to your sock puppet, too.
Sorry, but you actually claimed that
Chinese AI is handicapped by training that has to conform with Chinese Communist Party doctrine and revisionist history.
and this claim was decisively shown to be incorrect. The model knows about the events of Tiananmen and other historical facts inconvenient for the CCP's "doctrine and revisionist history", so the training isn't "handicapped".
But you trumptards can't admit you don't know what you're talking about even when you're shown totally wrong :)))
Re: (Score:2)
LOL. If its largely training from Anthropic or other western AI, its not really a Chinese AI, It a hybrid.
Complete bullshit. The Qwens are fully and independently Alibaba-trained, not distilled, a well-known fact. Small wonder, however, that you - the ignorant moron who thrives on propaganda - don't know this.
Even assuming that the Qwen series are all distilled (which they aren't), so what? The "western models" are trained on the corpus of human knowledge without giving anything back, so they aren't even a "hybrid", just a big theft of someone else's work anyway.
And what difference does it make? Your claim is s
Re: (Score:2)
Corporate models, Alibaba. Developed for the west, trained from western sources.
LOL WUT? How is the tongyi qianwen series "trained for the west"? Au contraire, it is universal in its capabilities and its emphasis is obviously on what China users want, as you could easily see from the large token vocabulary, for example, as it very obviously targets CJK ideographic languages first. But that's assuming you know at least a little about the subject and you're really, really ignorant even of the most basic knowledge of it.
I'm referring to gov't or gov't supervised project targeting internal audience audiences. Tools that will be accessible within the Great Firewall.
LOL, yeah, sure, that's exactly what you referred to in a thread that
Re: (Score:1)
Corporate models, Alibaba. Developed for the west, trained from western sources.
LOL WUT? How is the tongyi qianwen series "trained for the west"?
"From" not "for". Western data sources. You are also moving the goal post. We're not discussing an image classifier or other specialized smaller scale models, rather frontier LLM. The sort of thing one would use to research a topic with.
LOL, yeah, sure, that's exactly what you referred to ....
Yes, you misunderstand, guess wrong, or move goalposts to different things.
FYI, the very same model I'm using as an example above is freely accessible within the Great Firewall
Because you are moving the goal posts to smaller specialized things to manufacture your straw men.
Re: (Score:2)
"From" not "for". Western data sources.
Oh, really? And what are these "data sources" and what makes them "Western"?
We're not discussing an image classifier or other specialized smaller scale models, rather frontier LLM. The sort of thing one would use to research a topic with.
No, we're not discussing specialized models. We're discussing Qwen's open weight variant, a generalist reasoning model that performs exceptionally well on very modest hardware. So well, as to make the "frontier" models an expensive curiosity.
Yes, you misunderstand
No, I don't. You have no idea what you're talking about, as you also demonstrate above. But you have the urge to tell other people something that you believe is smart. It isn't.
Because you are moving the goal posts
LOL, YOU stepped
Re: (Score:1)
No, we're not discussing specialized models. We're discussing Qwen's open weight variant, a generalist reasoning model that performs exceptionally well on very modest hardware. So well, as to make the "frontier" models an expensive curiosity.
To even fit on modest hardware it has to be quite modest in ability. And as I've said, built for foreign use and built for internal use can be two very different things. The foreign use does not have to remain consistent with what one finds within the Great Firewall.
No, I don't.
Sorry, you did misunderstand. I'm discussing ChatGPT against let call it ChatCCP. Not the hobbyist stuff you can run on modest hardware. You have no idea what you're talking about, as you also demonstrate above. But you have the urge to tell
Re: (Score:2)
So, you cannot name any single Chinese model that is "handicapped by training" then?
Thought so.
Moron.
Re: (Score:1)
So, you cannot name any single Chinese model that is "handicapped by training" then? Thought so. Moron.
What poor reading comprehension you have, we are discussing why China is handicapped in the long run.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL, no, we're just laughing at the "brain-dead incompetent total failure"* who claims that "Chinese LLMs are handicapped by training" but can't name even one model 'handicapped by training', because the "boring fool"* is literally illiterate about the LLMs.
You try to "look smart, which isn't easy to do"*, yet you're "just another low I.Q. individual"* - a "low IQ disaster"*, really.
Sorry "loser and hater, but your I.Q. isn't one of the highest - and you know it! Please don't feel so stupid or insecure, it'
Re: (Score:1)
What poor reading comprehension you have, we are discussing why China is handicapped in the long run.
LOL, no, we're just laughing at the "brain-dead incompetent total failure"* who claims that "Chinese LLMs are handicapped by training" but can't name even one model 'handicapped by training
Again, that is you just clinging to you misunderstanding. We're discusssing frontier stuff, a ChatGPT vs for lack of a better name ChatCCP.
The modest (your terminology) models you can download and run locally are an entirely different thing. Plus there is the entire designed for external use and for internal use. Internal models will be compliant with the Great Firewall or they will undermine that firewall.
Re: (Score:2)
The moron persisted with his dumbfuck comments, but cannot name a single openweights model that is, to quote the moron "handicapped by training".
What can one do except ask the moron kindly to go be stupid somewhere else?
Re: (Score:1)
The moron persisted with his dumbfuck comments, but cannot name a single openweights model that is, to quote the moron "handicapped by training". What can one do except ask the moron kindly to go be stupid somewhere else?
Because your "modest" models that can be run locally are not the topic. We're talking ChatGPT level stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
We're talking ChatGPT level stuff.
Who's "We", are you a royalty, ignorant dumbfuck? ChatGPT has been obsolete for years.
BTW, can you name a more 'handicapped' LLM than your intellectual superior at america.gov?
Re: (Score:1)
We're talking ChatGPT level stuff.
Who's "We", are you a royalty, ignorant dumbfuck? ChatGPT has been obsolete for years.
LOL, ChatGPT is the front end, the user interface of the ever changing models underlying it.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL, what a moron indeed.
Re: (Score:1)
LOL, what a moron indeed.
Which part confused you? That ChatGPT is the chatbot performing the user interface role, or that LLMs behind it change over time, or that the LLMs include frontier-level that may be used for more difficult prompts?
Re: (Score:2)
The confused here is the moron who cannot even name the openweights Chinese model that is 'handicapped by training' so that we can verify that fact.
That would be you.
It isn't like there's a dearth of such models - quite a few of the frontier Chinese stuff is released in the open and can be run locally, in all sizes, from a few billion to trillion parameters.
Re: (Score:1)
The confused here is the moron who cannot even name the openweights Chinese model that is 'handicapped by training' so that we can verify that fact.
We aren't talking about your local models on modest hardware. That's just your straw man. We are talking about the much larger models running on cutting edge hardware, remote models. In particular those created for Chinese internal use, things behind the Great Firewall.
Re: (Score:2)
That's just your straw man.
Back at you, and you keep sticking to it because you know you have no way out. You're stupid as fuck, but not stupid enough to not realize you're completely out of your depth here, so you're desperately trying to find some reason sounding plausible to you to "win". See, there ain't no such reason precisely because you're ignorant.
But let me help, here is a list of several "much larger" models that I can't run on your or mine modest hardware that happen to be Chinese.
https://huggingface.co/zai-org... [huggingface.co]
https:// [huggingface.co]
Re: (Score:1)
That's just your straw man.
Back at you, ...
Not really, because the original conversation was about the big remote stuff, in particular for their domestic market where it would be unhelpful to contradict the Great Firewall. You just misunderstood, and cling to what referred to as local models running on "modest" hardware.
Re: (Score:2)
No, the original conversation was about all Chinese models.
You just went into it with your ignorance and you keep demonstrating it.
But even so, what's the empirical evidence these "big remote stuff" is "handicapped by training"?
Re:I'm so relieved (Score:5, Insightful)
China never lies about anything ...
People who have a coherent argument to make, and are not afraid to defend it, put their arguments plainly and directly.
Others use sarcasm in order to avoid committing to any real statement, and avoid any debate or criticism. It is a lazy, cowardly approach for the inarticulate. It doesn't make you wrong, just vague and not contributing to a debate.
Yes China lies. Tell us how that is different from your side, and what this actually means for AI negotiations.
Re: (Score:2)
> Tell us how that is different from your side,
What sides are you referring to?
Re: I'm so relieved (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> What side do you think?
I didn't ask "what side", nor was I responding to the TFS.
> Yes China lies. Tell us how that is different from your side, and what this actually means for AI negotiations.
I don't understand what quenda meant by "sides", so I asked about it. This is how conversation works. Thinking about each nation as a side makes no sense in context.
Re: (Score:2)
Thinking about each nation as a side makes no sense in context.
Bilateral talks have sides. It makes perfect sense. It doesn't make sense to pick a side like picking a sports team, but that doesn't mean there aren't two parties with opposing goals, ostensibly trying to reach a mutually beneficial agreement on a separate, shared goal.
Re: I'm so relieved (Score:2)
I'd be interested in the examples of "China lies". People just run it off like it's accepted.
Note that, to be a lie, it has to be deliberately wrong, not just wrong and/or ignorance. It can be quite difficult to prove intent. Even so, something to argue against, or even agree with, would be reasonable.
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine two AIs. ... trained on Chinese Communist Party doctrine and faux history.
Go on, you have the basis of an idea there. See if you can make an argument from it.
Is it purely hypothetical, do you believe it matches observations? Is that what you this Qwen is??
Please make a point.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure the meeting will be something along the lines of: Both countries agree to slow down AI releases so they can better safety test them before release; meanwhile behind the scenes, they speed up the development of even more powerful weaponized AIs 'just in case'.
I could even see China replacing the child labor on the Temu and AliExpress assembly lines with AI-controlled robots, and the only jobs really being mining rare-earth minerals, and working the rice paddies.
America won't be any better off, rega
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
China hasn't lied about coal usage. We know because we can measure it from space, since they have to burn it to extract the energy. This is the same as the false claims that they covered up tens of millions of COVID deaths. We would see it from satellites if they tried to.
That said, everyone bullshits Trump. Denmark just got him to agree to a 70 year old treaty on Greenland by telling him it was new and he was getting what he wanted for defence. Chances are whatever the agreement turns out to be, it will be
Re: (Score:2)
Re: I'm so relieved (Score:2)
Reference required for...all of above...
It sounds a lot like a load of BS to me, and, at best "pot calling the kettle black"...though I don't know who the pot is in this case, so shrug. Just the ramblings of a brainwashed sinophobe, maybe.
He's optimizing his income (Score:1, Troll)
Prove the parent wrong, or stop whining about your useful idiot status like a fucking child and grow up.
That would reduce his income. Yelling lies and a brief insult of America is sufficient for him to collect his $0.10 per post from the Chinese Communist Party.
Re:agreed to use the term "super intelligence" (Score:5, Informative)
It's a Trump international agreement. They nod in agreement to appease the overgrown orange baby and then burst out laughing as soon as they leave the room. Like every agreement with Trump.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, it isn't like trump is known for sticking to what he's agreed to, so treating him trump-like is par for the course.
Re:agreed to use the term "super intelligence" (Score:5, Informative)
I'm not sure why this was marked as troll, it's spot on in many cases. The most egregious example I can think of is Canada. He negotiated a free trade agreement with them, said it was the best thing ever, then fast forward 4 years, says it was the worst deal ever negotiated and then put tariffs on the trading partner which was honouring the agreement he himself made.
Trump's word isn't worth the tweet it was twote on, much less any paper.
Re:agreed to use the term "super intelligence" (Score:5, Insightful)
Trumpistan has lost. trump and the trump party are just too stupid and in denial, as long as their puppets like you keep parroting their propaganda. They'll shoot some missiles every now and then like the terrorists they are and claim victory.
Why can't they get the Iranian HEU stockpile?
Why aren't they able to destroy the remaining 70% of Iran's ballistic missile stockpile?
Why are trumpy, little marco and vajay dunce not accepting Iran's unconditional surrender?
Finally, although this was not a goal of the trumpistani special military operation, why are both Dire Straits still closed?
What a bunch of sore losers, to a regime that's basically medieval in political sophistication.
Re: (Score:1)
Wait until after the midterms.
After the midterms trump will be a lame amoeba president.
The Strait remains open to anyone else willing to risk Iranian terrorism
So, Iran has not surrendered then. How come, I heard trump "won" decisively 200+ times since February. "Won" strongly implies surrender of the side that lost, and it seems that isn't Iran.
70% of the usual oil is getting through.
Not even half is getting through, and zero distilled products, on the account of the many destroyed distilleries... Alongs
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
But it isn't. The US attack has bolstered public opinion for them, and ensured there's a new generation of Persians growing up to hate the US. It's funny how you complain about people supposedly hating you, then proceed to give them very good reasons to hate you.
Re:agreed to use the term "super intelligence" (Score:4, Informative)
He's agreed to stop Iran from getting nukes and it's working so far.
Much better than previous Presidents who tried to bribe Iran with cash to delay until 2030. When it would then become some other Presidents even bigger problem.
You mean the $400 million in Swiss francs [azpbs.org] Trump handed over to Iran? Or the hundreds of billions [politifact.com] in reconstruction funds Trump will eventually give Iran?
Re:agreed to use the term "super intelligence" (Score:5, Informative)
He's agreed to stop Iran from getting nukes and it's working so far.
Much better than previous Presidents who tried to bribe Iran with cash to delay until 2030. When it would then become some other Presidents even bigger problem.
Trump wasn't getting nukes in the first place and there was zero evidence that they made any progress since the sanctions on their previous nuclear deal.
Trump has agreed to give Iran more money than all previous presidents combined, and that's not taking into account the cost of his stupid war.
It only became some other President's bigger problem because that other president is a fucking moron. There's a reason zero people in the international community (no Netanyahu is not a person) agreed with Trump on this.
I'm genuinely impressed at the density of incorrectness in your post. It's like god decided to give you your brain on Friday afternoon right before clocking off.
Re: agreed to use the term "super intelligence" (Score:4, Informative)
And if the MOU had held up, they would've gotten it. There was a lot of money in there. A LOT. They even had Rubio start spinning it as "unfreezing isn't the same as paying," remember? But then that fell apart.
Re: (Score:2)
See the thing is that while you are crafting a compelling story it's just a story, it's fiction because the reality is pushing against all these things.
You are getting everything you want right now outside of a ground based invasion and it's going terribly, particularly if your goal is for Iran to stop pursuing nukes long term. Sure you pushed the timetable back some years but that's what JCPOA did too and didn't give us global instability while also leaving the rest of the world with less leverage over th
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you for exactly illustrating my point. You don't cite the actual facts on the ground, all you have is stories, maybes and what-ifs. Good story, but you're writing a fiction techno-thriller. The inconvenient reality yet again is there is no plan, that's what in yet again the real world we all live and not the one you've crafted in your head this military operation so far is a failure. Seriously when is the last statement about the status of the nuclear sites which this is all about?
That inconvenient
Re: (Score:2)
The fiction is just what you painted which while informed and maybe even insightful isn't actually true, it's a theory. You are betting on your crystal ball hinging in Iranian regime change which at this point is down to some type of internal populist overthrow which doesn't seem like it's happening. You can shout names at me all day long but right now, Sept 2026, the region is unstable. Pipelines are bombed, both straights are a mess, the Houthi are maybe taking over Yemen. What you call constructive ch
Re: (Score:2)
How do you know that?
I was also told Iran's military was destroyed, their missiles, their navy, their air force? Has the admin been lying to me? What are we doing? Why haven;t we destroyed those sites?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not arguing that Assad getting the boot wasn't a good thing for the region but there's no reason to think Iran's proxies won't be coming back after this conflict unless the regime actually falls which, is I would say is a long shot since no ground war. Houthies are rising, Hezbollah is hurting but they'll be back.
I'm content to simply leave things as they are forever if need be. Iranian regime can't persist on its own absent massive oil related cash flows. The regime is a parasite that needs a host to live in. Would love to see the blockade kept on Iran until the regime dies.
Ain't gonna happen unless the regime dies in the next 6 months of which there are little indicators. The economic cost is proving pretty high and there is no political or public support for ef
Re: (Score:2)
Trump hasn't agreed to give Iran any money at all. What are you smoking?
Trump's own press releases. You should listen to dear leader a bit more often.
Re: (Score:3)
Fox News is on 24h in your house huh.
Re: (Score:2)
U.S.-China Negotiations Report
Ying-Ying from China: Welcome Chinese delegation, please make yourselves comfortable in our Taiwan suite here at the Hotel Xi.
The Chinese delegation does just that.
Ying-Ying from China: Welcome U.S. delegation, please make yourselves comfortable in our Mr. P suite here at Hotel Xi.
The U.S. delegation does just that.
The Big Time arrives and both delegations are seated at a conference table.
Ying-Ying from China: Okay Gentleman, what brings y’all here?
Ying-Ying from China sp
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Super Intelligence" will only be used in English. So why shouldn't they agree. It's only the English arguments that will end up polluted.
OTOH, this agreement appears to mean exactly nothing. This perception may turn out to be wrong, but that's how it looks to me. But what could one expect when neither side could reasonably trust the other, and neither would agree to openly verifiable tests. (I.e. neither side *should* trust the other.)
Re: (Score:2)
"Super Intelligence" will only be used in English. So why shouldn't they agree. It's only the English arguments that will end up polluted.
/w LLMs semantics mostly get abstracted from language. Doing this is more like pissing in the neighborhood swimming pool rather than a jar labeled English.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe its a relative term , a sick parrot looks super intelligent compared to a senile bag of orange farts .
Trust China? (Score:1, Informative)
China have every reason to publicly support restricting AI development, while internally developing it anyway. They are well aware that they can get away with anything, while western nations will be held to account by their courts, media and public opinion once they have agreed to and signed any treaties or laws into place. China can sign the same things and completely ignore them, then deny it publicly when called out and get away with it. This is the world we live in whether we like it or not and we shoul
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, the "free world" lost its leaders and China is winning bigly.
Whether you admit it or deny it, you'll have to face it, trumpistani maggot.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I trust China a lot more than Trump.
Re: (Score:3)
I trust China a lot more than Trump.
Pretty much the entire world does at this point.
Re: (Score:2)
How do you plan on spending the $5000 he promised you?
It's a matter of perspective (Score:3)
I'm fully convinced that it does look like super intelligence to some people.
Re: (Score:2)
And since it will be friendly, we could call it, "super friend intelligence". That seems like it would be quite accurate.
Re: (Score:2)
Open weights models (Score:2, Insightful)
Long life and prosperous distillation future to (not only) Chinese open weights models. Hopefully they will not stop releasing them ... anytime soon at least.
Having the code and the training data open would be much better but don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, possibly because their lives aren't centered around their professed religion. Most "Christians" seem to be such only in professed belief.
Re: Albania (Score:2)
Super what?! (Score:3)
It's the word 'intelligence' that they should have dropped, not 'artificial'!
Super Moron (Score:1)
They are kissing up to Donny by letting him rename everything he farts on.
SI vs AI (Score:2)
I'm not sure why Trump wants to rebrand AI as SI, or even what SI is meant to refer to.
In the current lingo we have LLMs=AI -> AGI -> ASI, with only OpenAI wanting to call today's LLMs "AGI", despite being sub-human in many capabilities such as ability to learn and creativity, as well as many specific areas (lack of generality).
One reason the term "AI" seems to have taken off, is because people are, maybe unwittingly, using it to refer to a whole range of largely unrelated things, not just LLMs, but a
Concepts of a deal to start planning something (Score:1)
So the Subject is the concept of the joke I was hoping to find on this juicy topic, but Slashdot isn't laughing along. As usual these years.
I think Xi is a much slicker salesman than the YOB ever was, notwithstanding the YOB's claims of negotiating supremacy. Xi's real plan probably involves selling combat drones for the YOB's umphal arch. (Can't call it "triumphal" with nothing to triumph.) However the drones will turn out to be factory seconds marked way up, counting on the YOB's people's inability to rec
Conclave (Score:2)
US Sabotage (Score:1)
Double Speak (Score:2)
Call it (Score:1)