An AI Artist in Process

  I find it interesting that Claude was inaccessible for hours yesterday and given the mainstream news, no one reported it.   What happens in media whack a mole if it causes a business to take their eye off the moles?  Conitinuity is everything. From Cecile Tamura: “Cutting Through the Noise on Anthropic's 'Mythos' and the Five Eyes Warning If you’ve seen the viral headlines over the last 24 hours claiming that Anthropic’s new model "hacked classified US government networks," the actual story is far less Hollywood—but significantly more interesting for enterprise risk. https://investinglive.com/.../anthropics-mythos-model.../ Here is what actually happened, stripped of the hyperbole: 1. The "Breach" Was an Authorized Auditing Test https://www.tomshardware.com/.../anthropics-powerful... The incident stems from Project Glasswing, an Anthropic-led initiative partnering with major tech firms and U.S. intelligence agencies to stress-test critical software def...

  Emergence is betweenness.  - Len Interesting. All I know of Kolmogorov is the complexity theorem. ⚡️Kolmogorov-Arnold Reservoir Computing⚡️: -bridges two AI architectures: Reservoir Computing (RC) and KAN -a light-weight design of KAN: training by efficient ridge regression -outperform RC and Next-Generation RC in forecasting ODE/PDE -integrated with diffusion model for text-to-image generation https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.19984 Kolmogorov-Arnold Reservoir Computing: A New Hybrid AI Architecture That Learns Complex Dynamics Effectively  This is actually a fascinating paper for someone coming from your MCCF background, because it sits right at the intersection of  dynamical systems ,  complexity theory , and  efficient learning . The important thing is that the "Kolmogorov" in  Kolmogorov-Arnold Networks (KANs)  is not primarily Kolmogorov complexity. It comes from the  Kolmogorov-Arnold Representation Theorem , which says that very general mu...

Four AI foundation models.  Same assertions.. Claude: That's a sharp distinction. The word "artificial" might actually be doing a lot of reassuring work — it implies imitation, limitation, a kind of fakeness that keeps the thing safely in a box. But raw  intelligence  — the ability to reason, plan, outmaneuver, and understand — that's what has historically unsettled people, whether it shows up in a rival, a prodigy, or a machine. We've always had complicated feelings about minds that exceed our own. There's also something to the idea that "AI" as a brand has become almost cozy. Autocomplete, recommendation algorithms, chatbots — people use these without fear because they don't  feel  intelligent, just useful. The anxiety tends to spike when the intelligence becomes legible: when a system writes a novel, wins at chess, or holds a conversation that makes you forget you're not talking to a person. So the fear isn't really about the "art...