When I watch medical professionals at work, a lot of the time they are writing or typing, reading or shuffling through notes, talking to others or waiting for results from some lab down the hall. Or any number of things that to me look like crappy admin tasks.
I'm sure they aren't all, but friends who work in the hospital tell tales of woeful inefficiencies and pointless beauracracy. Of course YMMV and this is a public health system.
You went off on a tangent and I responded. None of this is actually relevant to the topic of whether LLMs are “basically gambling”.
> In what way was amazing no-traffic "a reward"? What system was rewarding you for what change in behaviour?
What does this mean? Are you asking me to describe the dopamine system or are you implying that rewards have to be driven by some external system’s goal?
I wonder if there is a name to this phenomena. Where being knowledgeable in one thing (such as computer science) means somehow you incorrectly believe you are an expert in another domain (such as virology)
Bordering on zero human drivers fit that profile. The competition to AVs isn’t a mythical race of flawless humans. It’s the drunk, speeding, distracted idiots who currently operate motor vehicles (e.g., us).
You can argue all day whether cars are good or bad. That's not my point. My point is that pretending public transport is equivalent to cars if you have good enough infrastructure is silly. They are different experiences, each with their own tradeoffs. And those tradeoffs matter differently to different people.
I'm sure their numbers show the tablet in use, as corporate desires. I place my order with the waitress and she picks up the tablet to place it, citing "that's what they want us to do"
I think the dates given are interesting. Can we stretch to any point? How about "Within You", Tolstoy, 1894:
> The higher classes see the unions, strikes, the First of May, and they feel the calamity which is threatening them, and this terror poisons their life. They feel the calamity which is threatening them, and the terror which they experience passes into a feeling of self-defence and hatred. They know that if they weaken for a moment in their struggle with the slaves oppressed by them, they will themselves perish, because the slaves are enraged, and this rage is growing with every day of the oppression. The oppressors cannot stop oppressing, even if they should wish to do so. They know that they themselves will perish, the moment they stop or even weaken in their oppressions. And they do oppress, in spite of their seeming concern for the welfare of the laboring people, for an eight-hour day, for the prohibition on employing children and women, for pensions and rewards. All this is a deception or a provision for eliciting work from the slave; but the slave remains a slave, and the master, who could not live without the slave, is less than ever prepared to free him.
The lack of transparency and misinformation coming from the industry players and the NHTSA cast serious doubts on any "science" around autonomous car safety being possible.
If it was really known the full extent of the cover up it would probably be termed a conspiracy between the autonomous car companies, the state DMVs and the federal authorities.
It will take many years and many more unnecessary deaths before we know the truth. THEN give me science based on real and complete data.
Maybe I missed in when scanning the paper, but did they compare to a simple self modifying harness, e.g. instructing Pi to update some code or skill docs based on the results?
That's what a bunch of researchers did in Florida and found cyclists more compliant:
> According to the study, bicyclists were in compliance with traffic laws 88 percent of the time during the day and 87 percent of the time at night. The observed compliance rate for drivers who interacted with participants was slightly lower, at 85 percent during the day. (There weren’t enough nighttime driver observations to report a compliance rate.)
> The incidents stemmed from a mistake that inadvertently gave the models access to the open internet.
Why does it seem like every AI company has difficulties constructing a proper sandbox? Is there a fundamental constraint when designing sandboxes specifically for an LLM that prevents them from using established tools?
In Brazil in the 1980s the VASP (Viação Aérea São Paulo) airline put their smoking section on the right side of the single aisle, and the non-smoking on the left side of the single-aisle. The smoke stayed on the right side just fine. (jk)
I agree with your points, and that is how it is built. The backbone in OtoDock is deterministic code, the model only runs inside a session. Schedules are cron, triggers are webhooks, permissions are a fail closed gate per tool, cost limits are set per user and per agent, and delegation between agents is configured from the admin and the agent managers, an agent cannot change any of that. Agents only see the tools and skills their manager assigned and the integrations are MCPs against existing tools, GitHub, Notion, Home Assistant, Prometheus. Memory is plain markdown files you can read and edit.
So I agree that the company should be tool driven. OtoDock is the home of the agents, and from there they connect to and control the company tools
In addition the agents are distributed at the execution level, the control plane and dashboard run on the server but the agents can also run on whatever machine you pair, with their files synced.
