They've already done most of the work. The enormous risk is behind them, as are the expensive human trials. Most of the marketing is too; Ozempic is a household name. All that's left is pulling in the profits to recoup all those expenses.

Public health care systems around the world provide good value for money. Private ones do too. The US system is a weird mix of private and hamstrung public that makes it an outlier on the bad side of the price/performance line. I doubt governments buying patents would improve that situation. Just negotiate group purchases like everyone else.

It is 1.5 percentile. I.e. 1.5% of humans who took the test scored better than it. I.e. it scored better than 98.5% of humans who took the test. Thus the sneaky summary "suggests the hype about large language models beating elite human coders is premature."

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F... [wikipedia.org]

(sorry, other reply was to the wrong post)

It is 1.5 percentile. I.e. 1.5% of humans who took the test scored better than it. I.e. it scored better than 98.5% of humans who took the test. Thus the sneaky summary "suggests the hype about large language models beating elite human coders is premature."

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F...

TWIX? Isn't that KitKat? Have a break have a KitKat ?

Is this not just the state known as flow? When your brain and body is in a locked state of focus and concentration such that the brain autonomously takes over control and can bring enhanced performance .

That depends on the country's takings law. I'm more familiar with the United States Constitution, which provides: "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." Canada's Expropriation Act (fact sheet) likewise guarantees market value to the property owner.

I'm sure their lawyers will bring that up at the trial. "Your honor, after publishing a false accusation of theft against this woman we eventually, after repeated requests, did some basic investigation and decided to stop."

Uh huh.

This is entirely unworkable.

Better tell US customs then. They've always checked drugs carried by people entering the US.

it would make sense for government to just buy out the patent so that much cheaper generic versions can be available to the citizens.

Why? Pharma companies can do math. If they were willing to sell the patent they would charge as much as they thought it was worth. Aside from a nice gift to the generic drugmakers, the result would just be the public taking on the risk of owning the patent.

You could decide the drug was critical and dictate the price. Besides being a bad precedent for the world's largest IP holding country, Novo is Danish so you'd also have international side-effects for other IP.

and CTRL ALT BACKSPACE doesn't quit X, you are saying your WHOLE machine is locked up ? Hardware, almost certainly is your problem.

They're probably not. The US Navy sponsored the science fairs he entered. They do that kind of thing to encourage talented kids to turn into talented adults who might want to work on weapons programs. It says right in the summary the MIT program is working on a different drone project.

This seems like exactly the kind of situation lawsuits are intended for. A google search of "UK false accusation law" turns up multiple ambulance chasing lawyer web pages that inform me that false accusations, as well as milder defamation, can be prosecuted both criminally and civilly and I should definitely contact them as soon as possible to make sure I know my rights.

LLMs are mostly composed of regular old fully connected ANNs, and the remainder, the transformers, are also ANNs. ANNs certainly can learn the rules of chess, and you can train one to play chess at a level that is generally regarded as superhuman. There's also a proof that any 2+ layer ANN of sufficient size can learn any IO function.

So there's nothing about the structure of an LLM that would make it unable to learn and follow the rules of chess. The fact that they don't, or don't do so very well, means that the way they are trained is an inefficient way to learn chess. Which shouldn't really be surprising to anybody who's read a book about something and then gone off a tried to do it with zero experience.

Have a citation for such an advertisement?

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.samaltman.com%2Fthe...
"Humanity is close to building digital superintelligence"
"we have recently built systems that are smarter than people in many ways"
"In some big sense, ChatGPT is already more powerful than any human who has ever lived."
etc.