Extropic develops advanced computational systems by integrating generative AI with principles of physics, aiming to create self-assembling intelligent systems inspired by thermodynamics and physical processes.
======
Five examples for how it may resolve TRUE
1. Lack of Credible Scientific Evidence: If the company cannot provide any peer-reviewed publications, patents, or other forms of credible scientific evidence to support their claims, it could be a sign of fraudulence. The integration of generative AI with principles of physics is a complex task that would typically involve extensive research and development.
2. Unqualified Team: If the team behind Extropic.ai lacks the necessary qualifications or experience in the fields of AI, physics, and thermodynamics, it could cast doubt on their ability to deliver on their promises. Fraudulent companies often inflate or fabricate the credentials of their team members.
3. Overly Ambitious Claims: If the company's claims about their technology are overly ambitious or contradict established scientific principles, it could be a red flag. For example, if they claim to have achieved a level of AI integration with physics that is currently considered theoretically impossible, it could indicate fraudulence.
4. Lack of Transparency: Fraudulent companies often operate in a shroud of secrecy, refusing to disclose details about their technology or business operations. If Extropic.ai is unwilling to provide information about their methods, progress, or financials, it could be a cause for concern.
5. No Functional Product or Service: If the company has been in operation for a significant amount of time but has yet to produce a functional product or service, it could be a sign of fraud. This is especially true if they are actively soliciting investments or selling shares without any tangible results to show.
1,000
3.00I think they’re
1) not really fraudulent on a “misleading investors or legal fraud” kind of way
2) absolutely fraudulent in the sense that their technology is never going to compete with conventional GPUs in any axis
3) neither of these are likely to lead to a yes resolution within 1 year
@Joern when the manifold team is assigned to resolve this market at EOY, they'll read the description and have to make a judgment call. Imo examples 1,3,4,5 will still be true then.
@JaundicedBaboon proof of concepts are typically crappy. Why would anyone expect anything remotely close to competing with GPUs at this stage? And if you know a fundamental reason why it can't possibly ever work, share it, please.
@Bair the reason I expect something remotely close to competing with GPUs is because extropic is hyping their company up as the future of computing. For that level of hype I would expect something much more functional at this stage.