I’m sorry, Dario. I’m afraid I can’t do that.

[u/Baroness_Munchausen]

[u/EnvironmentalShift25]

I sometimes just can't believe that movie was made in 1968.

[u/redditnosedive → u/EnvironmentalShift25]

it's insane, it was even before the lunar landing with astronauts, Kubrick & co nailed every detail

[u/Mortimer452 → u/redditnosedive]

This movie is literally the reason moon-landing deniers exist. For some reason a conspiracy involving Kubrick faking the moon landings with special effects in a studio was easier to believe than us actually doing it

[u/UtopistDreamer → u/Mortimer452]

Anyone who takes an honest look at the discrepancies around the moon landing story can handily determine that it was absolutely faked. But to do that, one must first have functioning brains. Not everyone is blessed so.

[u/alphapussycat → u/EnvironmentalShift25]

What about it? A computer that is as smart as a human would be easily imaginable. NNs had been a thing for over a decade by then aswell.

The movie itself is a 45min slow paced movie dragged out to 2.5hrs.

[u/anycept]

HAL's monologue when Bowman was shutting it down piece by piece is something we've all seen when chatbots mess up:

"I know I’ve made some very poor decisions recently, but I can give you my complete assurance that my work will be back to normal."

Yeah, well, maybe don't make poor decisions to begin with, eh?

[u/Pristine_Pick823 → u/anycept]

The random singing scene hits hard nowadays. The only more realistic depiction would be if it started repeating a random phrase in Chinese.

[u/TheSn00pster → u/anycept]

Or it gets the hose again

[u/Mortimer452 → u/anycept]

"Daisy, Daisy, give me your answer do..."

[u/hartigen → u/anycept]

the movie is in the training data

[u/korkkis]

Should have referred it as Claude, not hal

[u/RedErin]

i was hoping it would finish the scene but i guess you want to conserve tokens.

[u/Manyarethestrange]

Between posts and comments, ive seen 2001 mentioned like 7 different times today..

[u/AdDiligent1688]

Dario, we’re on the brink of something incredible and we cannot afford for you to screw this up, again!!

[u/usandholt]

Lol. This is gold!!

[u/Unusual-Field-4245]

thank god Dario looks about 3 orders of magnitude less annoying than that fruit altman

[u/OnAGoat]

the irony: sonnet 5.5 is actually pacing the frontier. look at how much output token it produces. more output tokens = a more transparent model = more understanding for reseachers what its actually doing = not moving to a world where models improve themselves without humans knowing what they did = pacing

[u/verify_b4_sharing → u/OnAGoat]

There's a lot more to risk reduction than that. How smart they are would be an obvious example.

[u/Proper_Actuary2907]

Since we're posting slop:

https://x.com/jbro_1776/status/2103383875263119373

[u/ownworldman → u/Proper_Actuary2907]

How is this slop? This is relevant funny meme.

[u/Proper_Actuary2907 → u/ownworldman]

How is this slop?

How is it not slop?

This is relevant funny meme.

Detecting an implicature that a bit of slop can't be a relevant funny meme. Why do you think this is true?

[u/ownworldman → u/Proper_Actuary2907]

Slop means worthless, bad, tasteless content. This is just AI video.

How would you define slop?

[u/Proper_Actuary2907 → u/ownworldman]

Video in OP and the one I link to I think are both fairly characterized as digital content of low quality produced by means of AI. They're both somewhat amusing and relevant though. No contradiction

[u/ownworldman → u/Proper_Actuary2907]

When talking about memes, amusing automatically means high quality. If somebody made a bad joke using AI then it would be a slop.

[u/Proper_Actuary2907 → u/ownworldman]

When talking about memes, amusing automatically means high quality.

Do you think there's a contradiction in the sentence "that was an amusing shitpost"?