I haven't really seen anybody in the AI safety field who isn't contributing to the idea that this one technology is The Next Best Thing That's Too Big To Fail.
It's more like two bad ideologies clashing. Corporate capture vs total deregulation. Kalshi vs Polymarket, almost. Evil vs evil.
If two journalists testing cars are able to get targeted this badly by the police, what percentage of average citizens are going to be harassed by police using false data and fudged reports, where literally nobody in the command chain is ever held responsible?
This is an interesting article. Flock is trying to pander to both sides by admitting some bad apples are in the police force, but then refusing to provide further information or actually fix their system. The line must go up.
Especially when it's the majority of all data center buildout (if these companies had their way, the amount would be higher), the GPUs inside them presently can't be repurposed if demand doesn't catch up (or if they just depreciate), and nobody knows how to make these profitable
Sounds like the Mozilla CEO has joined the AI evangelism war on the side of the evangelists.
“I don't want seven AGIs, one for every single one of the big companies. I want seven billion AGIs,” Krikorian says, referring to artificial general intelligence. “I want us to each have an AGI that's truly on our side, not on someone else's side.”
No wonder he's doing Star Wars comparisons, because this is a fantasy thing that the world's billionaires can't figure out how to build.
The report contains clues about how Mozilla might be planning to sustain itself if the revenue streams from Firefox dry up. “You shouldn't be surprised if in a few months you see that we've released our own harness,” Krikorian tells TIME.
Because there aren't enough of those, and because Mozilla will definitely entice people to pay money to them because... Why?
In February at the India AI Summit, [Current AI] teamed up with Bhashini, the Indian government’s AI language division....
Current AI operates as a “public-private partnership” bringing together governments , companies, and philanthropies to fund public interest tech, she told TechCrunch. The French government seeded Current AI with $100 million , joined by the Ford Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, DeepMind, and Salesforce — bringing total committed funding to $400 million. “They’re not investors; they’re funders,” Bdeir said.
Great, now taxpayers are being forced to contribute to AI development.
Earlier this month in Geneva, Current launched Alpha Chat, an open-source chatbot assembled in seven weeks by a coalition of ten organizations, including Hugging Face, Mozilla, and MIT Media Lab.
Nice to see Mozilla is spending donation money responsibly.
Worth noting that Alpha Chat relies on data sets owned by Common Crawl (via Fineweb2 on Kili, via Apertus). Common Crawl got caught for deceptive data scraping practices in 2025.
Warnings about it being “early days” and “hallucinations” both anthropomorphise the bot and provide ready-made excuses for when one of its constant failures are noticed.
Three years later and the "early days" routine is still going strong. Who would have thought?
Kind of shocking the numbers above don't say anything about viewership at all, really. Just that the titles exist somewhere.
But Facedeer is a notorious troll, so his big "gotcha" moment is apparently that people can't tell or enjoy this stuff. I doubt it. Netflix trash definitely includes $200 million blockbuster flops that nobody knows about (have you or most movie fans ever heard of Fountain of Youth?), that are getting churned out from the back catalog of Skydance, owned by the son of surveillance king Larry Ellison.
If nobody wants a Guy Ritchie heist blockbuster with John Krasinski and two Star Wars alums including Natalie Portman, who's to say they "want" anything worse from Netflix?
On several occasions, we’ve been exposed to folks that have been sort of lukewarm on our main offerings, but they really, really wanted to use AI to perform a natural language query on their data. And we thought “Okay, if you really want to see it, maybe we can caveat this appropriately and show you what it might look like.”
This was a terrible mistake. It backfired in the most predictable way imaginable – every lukewarm client that saw the chatbot in action, even with us telling them that it was not going to accomplish what they wanted, wanted to buy it immediately. Every other consideration, including millions of dollars that we could plausibly help them achieve by non-AI means, was swept aside. It was like a dark and terrible force seized control of their limbs, plunged their hands into their own chests, and presented their still-beating credit cards to us in grim supplication.
The writing here (and everywhere) is phenomenal, and this section echoes something I've seen Cal Newport say before, something along the lines that somebody with no technical knowledge sees one neat trick and suddenly assumes AI will turn into a superintelligence deity.
Not only is it limited in its scope, it's also good PR for AI. (Not quite as good as "accidentally" leaked Slack messages or strongly worded letters, but close.)
Can't wait to find out how big the investor subsidies were to make this model, alongside the subsidies for whatever it probably copied off (OpenAI? Anthropic?) It would be funny if it weren't for the harm done in the process
I haven't really seen anybody in the AI safety field who isn't contributing to the idea that this one technology is The Next Best Thing That's Too Big To Fail.
It's more like two bad ideologies clashing. Corporate capture vs total deregulation. Kalshi vs Polymarket, almost. Evil vs evil.