Any model that is going to be meaningfully useful is going to have the potential for harm too. It's not possible to know enough about chemistry to be useful to a chemist, without also being able to figure out how to synthesize drugs. It's not possible to have enough knowledge to be useful to any/all programmers, without being able to figure out how to hack a system, or create a virus. That's just kind of life though.
It's not that simple. The odds are always stacked in favor of the hacker. It's like saying, "why not just make a prison that's impossible to escape from". You can make a prison very, very hard to escape from, but you have to shut off every possible way someone could try to escape, whereas someone trying to escape only has to find one vulnerability, once. It's much harder to plug every possible hole in a complex system than it is to find one point of weakness.
China can produce chips at "7nm", that's more like 8-10 years behind. My M1 macbook pro is 6 years old, and that chip was made using a "5nm" process. The advanced US chips are now on "2nm". Explain to me how China is going to produce a computer that beats US supercomputers using 10 year old technology.
China has already produced a supercomputer that has beaten all US supercomputers, which was made public a month ago, and now it occupies the first place in Top 500.
Not only it has the greatest absolute performance, but it also reaches a much greater percentage of its maximum theoretical performance, due to having a very high memory bandwidth, 8 TB/s per socket (5 times higher than for the fastest US CPUs, faster than for any older US GPUs and equal to the fastest US datacenter GPUs of last year from NVIDIA and AMD), and due to using the Arm Scalable Matrix Extension (SME) instruction set, instead of using GPUs.
The previous AMD datacenter GPUs, which are used in the fastest US supercomputers, had a lower memory bandwidth than the new Chinese CPUs. Only this week AMD has introduced 2 new datacenter GPUs, one for AI and one for HPC, which are considerably faster, but it will take some time until such datacenter GPUs will be deployed in great quantities. NVIDIA has introduced Rubin for datacenters, which also has a greatly improved memory bandwidth (22 TB/s), but it uses extremely expensive memory (with a very high clock frequency) and it is usable only for AI, not for HPC, where AMD remains without competition, except for the new Chinese CPUs.
Recent Chinese chips have been cut and analyzed with electron microscopes and they already have finer metal and gate pitches than anybody has previously reached without EUV lithography, similar to the TSMC "5nm" processes. They are denser than CPUs like the Intel "7 nm" Ice Lake and Tiger Lake and somewhat denser than AMD Zen 3 CPUs.
Their fabrication throughput is much lower than at TSMC, because they must use multiple exposures to reach such a resolution, and they must have a poor fabrication yield, but there is a huge difference between being able to make only slowly something and not being able at all to make it.
Their technology is about at the 2021 level, i.e. 5-year old, not 10-year old, but their design capabilities are much better than their fabrication capabilities. Thus products like their new CPU for HPC offer top performance competitive with anything else available today, not the performance of the CPUs from 5 years ago. Like I have said, the only disadvantage caused by their old fabrication technology is in the worse energy efficiency, i.e. high power consumption, and it does not affect the achievable absolute performance.
While that CPU is intended mainly for HPC, i.e. FP64 computations, it can also perform fast computations with FP16, BF16 and INT8, and it has very fast interconnections between computers (low latency 1.6 Tb/s communication links) so it could do very well AI training or inference.
So there is no doubt that the US policy of export restrictions has been a complete failure, because without it the Chinese would not have had today such CPUs, or such GPUs like the Huawei GPUs.
Neither one is illegal though. Scraping the internet is as legal as surfing the internet. And what Anthropic calls "distillation attacks" is really just paying for and using the service Anthropic provides. I would think a judge would have the same view of distillation as they do of scraping, if Anthropic doesn't want a subscriber to have access to the model, they are within their rights to block access, but it's not the user's job to refrain from using the service. If their usage is so different from everyone else's, they should be easy to detect and block. If their usage is so similar to everyone else's that it's difficult to detect, then it shouldn't be of any concern.
I'm not asking them to give me something for nothing. The whole point is to get me hooked and spending so that when those credits run out or a year is up, I'll have to start paying cash. That's like saying giving someone free heroin is just giving them something for nothing. No, the person giving the heroin absolutely has a reason for doing it, and it's not for nothing.
I'm not asking for them to send me a GPU, just to let me use a GPU instance, you know, like people often do in cloud computing. I'm guessing you've never heard of it. More of a kitchenwares guy?
Ok, and when there's a power outage at my house as happens quite often in CA? When my internet goes out about once a week and I'm not home to reset it, what then? Just tell the customers "Sorry, I'm running this out of my garage, it's the best thing to do".
Seems like a bait and switch when instead of saying "We can give you that SKU in this data center" they say "We can give you that SKU if you use a paid plan".
You must be using some of the higher priced GPUs(which they offered me), but I'm looking for something in the <$1k/month range.
I'm just finshing up my first macOS app. I went with SwiftUI because I was new and didn't want to learn an "old" tech. The reality is outside of very basic stuff, SwiftUI is not capable of doing a lot of stuff, so I ended up have to learn not only AppKit as well, but how to fuse AppKit into SwiftUI and fuse SwiftUI into AppKit.
My advice is don't be attracted by the shiny toy that is SwiftUI. It's a steaming pile to dung, unless you just want some basic forms/tables/text.
It’s probably more productive to mention what about SwiftUI is a “steaming pile of dung”. For most mobile UI, you can spit out a working design faster than w/ AppKit. It doesn’t even have to be one or the other, you can meld both.
What’s the value in talking about SwiftUI being incapable when you don’t mention what you can’t do in it.
It doesn’t support a lot of what you can do in AppKit at the moment. There are also many bugs in it where it will throw asserts or stop working or draw incorrectly.
