My experience is that AI is just that, a “mech suit for your brain.” It has no creativity or volition but has superhuman memory, superhuman speed, and superhuman context in some narrow cases.

So it takes a thought and unfolds it, looks up relevant thoughts and information, elaborates, works through implications, and in some cases can execute.

You could do all that but like doing math manually it would take forever. You could manually calculate a spreadsheet too.

so in this new AI LM / agent world , AI is only going to be as good as the "AI Conductor". The human which can build the rules, validate the output , and Conduct the AI properly

Oh man, all of these press releases are definitely worth billions of dollars.

Great time to be a PR firm owner.

I guess we are recycling company names now? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking_Machines_Corporation

(I know, Corp vs. Lab).

> We train strong models

Where? When? Unless I missed any of their models

While I understand this is a PR talk for a startup, I think the text itself contains a number of interesting observations.

Regarding the idea of distributed models communicating with each other, I have also been thinking (and writing [1]) along those lines, where I see that the data amounts needed to fully digitalize ourselves and our society requires far too much storage if just serialized (limited by bandwidth if nothing else), while smart, updateable models are actually a much better storage medium for such information, as it can communicate only the important bits (any new information) on a higher level, with each other.

The other observation here that rings bells for me is how I think lessons from trying to develop intelligent systems should upvalue the human mind rather than devalue it, as we start to treat it less like an ad-hoc thing, and more like the finely tuned machine it is, which also benefits greatly from optimizing what data we feed it with, the architecture of solution strategies etc. All of which is an area where humans and machines can do wonders together [2].

[1] https://livingsystems.substack.com/p/the-future-of-data-less...

[2] https://livingsystems.substack.com/p/ai-progress-should-upgr...

Why would you call your company Thinking Machines if you believe this, by calling them that you're already framing them as replacing the human act of thinking.

Feels like they appropriated the name first, then pivoted ideologically to differentiate themselves from everyone else.

Thinking Machines is back? Or is this a jaded attempt to use the brand for cache?