The mechanics are old school, as with basically all RTS, but the openness allows for far more experiments than one would assume in a proprietary game.
9,795 karma · joined June 2, 2011
The mechanics are old school, as with basically all RTS, but the openness allows for far more experiments than one would assume in a proprietary game.
From an outside perspective, it is perplexing to see the constant back and forth webdevs do between making website more complex and rediscovering the simpler first principles
Ok, zero data, except the data used in the teacher model.
Thought it could be a useful precision.
US grandparents think you can buy a house with a part time job, Japanese ones think that you could save a life with a watermelon. Different delusions.
Still needs work
Do users care about that? I care about features stability and avoidance of shitification.
That's why I am usually preferring open models to depending on OpenAI's API. This drama has me curious about the outcome and if it leads to more openness from OpenAI, it may gain me back as a user.
But nothing forbids people to pursue less efficient endeavors during their free time. There are people maintaining old cars and locomotive. There are people gardening or woodworking "inefficiently" for their own pleasure.
What we remove is the need to force people to work on these fields. Whether we abandon them altogether depends solely on our culture.
We should be embarrassing the weight of labor lifted from our shoulders and organize society so that it becomes desirable. Replaced professionals should be allowed to go into retirement directly and access some form of basic income. There should be incentives to automating your own work.
Now incentives are on the other way: everyone tries (understandably) to make it as hard as possible to be replaced but this just leads to a world of bullshit jobs pretending to be useful while the AIs do all the heavy lifting.
These are the downsides. These are promises. Not actual performances.
Yes, differentiable code is already a new paradigm (write a function with millions of parameter, a loss function that requires more craft than people realize and train). That has a property that used to be the grail of IT project management: it is a field where, when you want to improve your code performance, you can just throw more compute at it.
And I think that the clumsy but still impressive attempts at code generation hints at the possibility that yet another AI-caused paradigm change is on the horizon: coding through prompt, adding another huge step on the abstraction ladder we have been climbing.
Forget ChatGPT coding mistakes, but down the road there is a team that will manage to propose a highly abstract yet predictable code generator fueled by language models. It will change our work totally.
Had ChatGPT been an open model, like OpenAI was supposed to produce, this kind of applications would have seemed obvious and happened in the first two weeks after release.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david-graeber-bullsh...
Here is a dystopia we don't hear about too often: instead of robotic overlords, infinite inequality or labor-less utopia, automation could instead be met with an increase of bullshit jobs validating each others. (Iain Banks' Walking On Glass is the closest I found)
While it is a closed garden, I'll begrudgingly accept it can be marginally better in some fields than other options, but Apple tries very hard to be a proprietary island in a world that has switched to free software.
Note that there are tons of CE certification. For radio cert for instance they don't need to open the box.