vitally3643

There are reasonable arguments against language ports, but this is not one. You're making an argument against code changing at all ever.

What is apparently noteworthy now is that anyone can now have the ability to build and abandon a project just like Real Programmers do

Very informative, thank you for your comment. You have truly contributed to the conversation. Good job.

Open your phone keyboard and just keep mashing the next predicted word until it stops predicting words. It will eventually collapse into a loop of predicting the same words in a nonsense sentence. Does it ever stop predicting "wrong" words?

That's literally how an LLM works. It predicts the next most likely word and that's it.

That's pretty much it. The reasons don't really go much deeper. There are deeper threads you can pull at and more well reasoned and thought out objections to China, but those are academic. The people in power don't care/can't comprehend anything more sophisticated than "communism bad".

Or are you talking about a different Poland?

People don't take up that much space and there is a strong tendency for populations to collapse into concentrated cities. In general, across the entire human species. All cultures and countries behave this way.

I think you've got plenty of free land.

If your employees can suddenly magically do more work with the same pay, that's free money (for you). You can pay fewer employees, or pay them less by threatening to replace them with the magic robot.

The magical thinking version of this is that your productivity gains magically translate into more customers and more sales for the same input cost and labor. The free money is really free because you're a magical special snowflake company and every consumer will want your brand of magic machine outputs and not the other guy's. Where does all this money come from? Do those extra customers even exist? Who cares!

But sure, "word games". Sure.

Welcome to the postmodern internet. It's vibes all the way down.

Through a combination of internal and external factors, lithium batteries go through irreversible chemical changes on every charge cycle. Total charge capacity always trends down. Depending on a large number of variables, this might happen quickly or it might happen so slow you might never notice at all. It's all down to how and where the battery is used because temperature is mostly what drives the chemical reactions.

The other thing is that lithium batteries which have been deeply discharged below safe levels are permanently damaged. Just like charge cycle wear, this can be immediately apparent, or something that goes unnoticed forever, but the cell is damaged and will never be the same. Recharging such a battery can cause physical damage inside the cell.

Point is, batteries are chemical cells. They don't last forever because most chemical reactions are not perfectly reversible. Their specific application and environment strongly affects how long they last. But we do know conclusively that when lithium batteries are kept hot and charged and discharged at high current (such as in a handheld gaming device), they degrade faster. Cells which are kept at a stable temperature and low currents (such as headphones) degrade very slowly and can last a long time.

If you look past superstition, there's an entire industry that's been rigorously studying this problem for decades. There's a lot of literature and evidence.

Lithium cells do degrade. How fast they degrade depends on cell quality and environmental factors. It is, unequivocally, a question of when a battery will fail. It might well be a decade or two, but it will fail eventually.

Through engineering.

This isn't new by any stretch of the imagination. Throughout our entire history as a species, we've been building things long, long before we had the tools to understand them. We built bridges and massive cathedrals before we invented geometry. We built and optimized steam engines for a century before we developed the language of fluid dynamics to understand why those designs were optimal.

Engineering very frequently is far ahead of the science needed to explain it.

As far as consciousness goes, personally I think it's an emergent property that will arise on its own when conditions are right. It will take a lot of experimentation to establish the right conditions, and then generations of study to figure out why those conditions were ideal for consciousness to emerge.

Because realistically we can't learn about consciousness with a sample size of one (us). We need to study other consciousnesses to understand the why and hows.

So I decided to load up everything with more then 3GB of VRAM into various machines on the network. Anything that could conceivably run an LLM of any utility. I've been experimenting with driving a swarm of heterogenous LLMs into coding tasks. I have models as small as llama3.2:3b up to Qwen3.6:27b dense. Over 10 unique models in the swarm.

So far, the results are... interesting. Coding isn't great, but what has worked shockingly well is polling the swarm for opinions. Getting ten unique perspectives synthesized into a single summary has been astonishingly useful. When I gave the swarm the ability to debate with itself, the results got even more interesting.

The end goal here is an autonomous routing network that learns which models excel at which tasks, which machines can fit which models, and intelligently routes requests and models to where they're most effective.

I can't afford an RTX 6000, but I can run smaller models on the pile of GPUs I do have. So far it hasn't worked out the way I'd hoped, but it did turn out to be very useful in other ways. Hopefully soon I can get coding worked out and the swarm can drive itself into self-improvement

If the second half of that reader engagement doesn't pay off, the sentence reads as clunky or incorrect, likely a mistake from a second language speaker.

Natural languages are not code and words can't be swapped arbitrarily. Word choice and construction carries meaning in and of itself, totally divorced from the actual words used.