2,563 karma · joined June 21, 2024
And Linux development and adoption helps everybody not just France. A win win.
We need judges and policymakers that punish harshly this behavior and force companies to compete in quality and price instead of lies and competition elimination.
No. LLMs do not confabulate they bullshit. There is a big difference. AIs do not care, cannot care, have not capacity to care about the output. String tokens in, string tokes out. Even if they have all the data perfectly recorded they will still fail to use it for a coherent output.
> Collapsing the dimensionality is going to be lossy, which means it will have gaps between what it thinks is the reality and what is.
Confabulation has to do with degradation of biological processes and information storage.
There is no equivalent in a LLM. Once the data is recorded it will be recalled exactly the same up to the bit. A LLM representation is immutable. You can download a model a 1000 times, run it for 10 years, etc. and the data is the same. The closes that you get is if you store the data in a faulty disk, but that is not why LLMs output is so awful, that would be a trivial problem to solve with current technology. (Like having a RAID and a few checksums).
To keep the goverment accountable is a duty of every citizen and the only way to have a functioning society. The failure is to let the goverment be arbitrary and cater to the powerful instead of following the rule of law and applying it equally at all levels.
Why is not this a criminal offense? They are hurting business for profit (or for higher valuation as they probably have no profit at all).
Why are corporations allowed to do with impunity what could land even a teenager years in prison? Is there no rule of law anymore?
The five-year and ten-year penalties kick in only when the government can show the offense caused at least $5,000 in losses across all victims during a one-year period. https://legalclarity.org/what-are-the-punishments-for-a-ddos...
You are not wrong.
Yes. It was nice when corporate taxes were high, xenophobia was seen as something bad, and movies could focus on smaller problems satire.
I hope that we go back to the socialist era of the USA with unionization, safety nets and welfare for the working class instead of for billionaires. Movies could just be silly again.
IBM is not in consumer products nor services so we do not hear about it.
One way is that the law applies to everybody equally. That has been the way it works for many years, not perfectly, in democratic countries.
There is another way of working were the law is not blind. Laws are applied based in who is the one affected. This is what big tech and the ultra-rich have been advocating for. The law applies differently to nobility and aristocrats than to the working class.
So, for all this big tech companies the law is clear: I can copy from you, you cannot copy from me.
(That is horrifying in case that anyone needs me to spell it out)
Neoliberalism at its finest. The world moving towards conservatism has left us with this model: The working class takes the hit of each crisis from small to big.
It is not a sustainable model.
Yes. I have noticed that is close to impossible to get good deals on flights, hotels, or even good discounts on-line. Sellers have all the information from consumers that they need to maximize their profit and extract the maximum amount from consumers. Dynamic pricing is making it a personalized experience, so I personally pay the maximum I possible can.
No room to get a fair price anymore.
It says a lot about the current economy that consumers have no money. Will companies just stop making consumer products?
In a world where consumers have less and less power, products are designed to please CEOs.
Money is power, as inequality grows and concentrates the average user/worker/citizen has less power and their voices matter less. Today's Internet is designed for the needs of big corporations, users are there just as another product to be sold.
Is this not just the strategy of all platforms. Spy on all customers, see what works for them and copy the most valuable business models. Amazon does that with all kinds of products.
Platforms will just grow to own all the market and hike prices and lower quality, and pay close to nothing to employees. This is why we used to have monopoly regulations before being greedy became a virtue.
You missed the point. More tests can be detrimental to the patient's health as increase the risk of unneeded medication or surgery. Also many test like x-rays have their own risks. To do them for the sake of it increases overall mortality.
So, to not over test is not just cheaper but better for people's health.
Marketing and entertainment are supplanting news and knowledge. I hope that the people that is pushing back succeed.
I can see this kind of survival-bias stories distorting the reality. To have millions of people asking for "specific tests" because AI told them seems problematic. One in a million will discover something, and that story will be enough to create the believe that is "worth doing the test that AI says" just in case. But...
> which came back 6 times higher than its supposed to be.
It has been proven that massive testing creates many false positives.
This happened during covid: https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n1411/rr
Tests may not be as reliable as though but they are good enough when other symptoms are accounted for. To randomly test people based on AI hallucinations can increase the number of unnecessary medication or even interventions.
I have always done that steps with my team and the results are great.
If you are a solo developer I understand that the LLM can help somewhat but not replace a real team of developers.
No, it does not. If you have a developer that knows C++, Java, Haskell, etc. and you ask that developer to re-implement something from one language to another the result will be good. That is because a developer knows how to generalize from one language (e.g. C++) and then write something concrete in the other (e.g. Haskell).
I'm encouraging people to regulate big corporations. Fighting individually against corporations larger than countries makes no logical sense. What you are asking me is to follow a losing strategy.
> It was obvious from begin that the whole purpose of the game was that naive players are to take pictures of objects that are of interest to Niantic for free.
Even if a scam is obvious, it is still a scam and needs to be stop by the rule of law.
And for me it is not just the lack of transparency. It is the power balance. I should not need to work for free, give my data, and god knows what to play a game. I should not be living knowing that I am being exploited at each interaction with software. Transparency is good, but not enough. "Click here to accept" and thousands of lines of legalese do not create a fair society.
That's an oxymoron. Prompts by definition are ambiguous otherwise you will be writing code.
Each time a Linux system library changes a space, billions or trillions of lines of code around the world are affected by it. To encapsulate complexity does not mean to eliminate complexity.
I do not work at that level, but I work low enough in our system as to potentially affect much of it on each change.
If your changes only affect your own code is because is high level enough as to not have anything build over it.
Context matters.
You can because, I guess, your project may have a small scope, few people working on it, no dependencies etc.
I cannot, because each line that I change has an effect in millions of other lines and hundreds of other people, and millions of users.
Different situation, different needs.
For very small projects, code may be the main bottleneck. Just to write the code is what takes most of the time. Adding code faster can accelerate development.
For larger projects, design, integration, testing, feature discovery, architecture, bug fixing, etc. takes most of the time. Adding code faster may slow down development and create conflicts between teams.
Discussing without a common context makes no sense in this situation.
So, depending on your industry and the size of the projects that you have worked on one thing or the other may be true.
USA, Europe, and many other countries depend on China for manufacturing. I doubt that this is going to solve inflation.
But it will fill the pockets of a few people in oil rich countries that can still export.
In my country TV has always been regulated. Pornographic movies could only be shown at late hours, there was no data gathering nor targeted ads, and nobody could reach children privately thru TV.
Not all parents have the means and time to be with their children all the time. There is a bare minimum of children safety that we need to guarantee as a society.
Many children grew up watching TV unattended without risk of being sexually harassed or radicalized. And with time children shows became even better and with less ads for toys and so. Regulating TV was great to achieve a better live for everyone.
> reeks of the Catholic moms protesting HBO,
Different country, different culture. You are applying American logic to non-American concerns.
> If you want to enrich and entertain your kids without exposing them to topics you consider unsavory, buy them a book instead of an iPad. It's not rocket science.
That way all responsibility is on the parents while big corporations increase the pressure on children to keep consuming their content. I prefer a world where criminal behavior is punished instead of blaming the victims for not avoiding the danger.
Is all security a weasel word for surveillance? You answer a valid argument with a meme. It is very unproductive.
How do you suggest to disallow children access to pornography, harmful content, etc? Or are you arguing that any solution is worse than the harm that bad actors in search of money and political gain are doing to children?