PupBiru @ PupBiru @kbin.social

Posts

0

Comments

343

Joined

2 yr. ago

i mean if the shoe fits: the original implication was countries who receive foreign aid, and considering the skew of federal money towards red states……

unverified by me, but @Deestan said:

The implied connection to the failed landing is dishonest. He was admitted to the hospital over a week before the lander crashed.

https://lemmy.world/comment/3014959

Would you like to add a tip for your robot defenders to this months subscription fee for AI Protection Max Ultra (tm)?

(not an american here, so my opinion is basically worthless but from the outside:)

various people said similarly about both:

trump was so wild how could he possibly get elected?

hillary lacks anything that gives anyone any excitement at all, how’s she going to bring out voters?

similar can (and has) been said about biden as hillary: there’s not a whole lot to be excited about, but “not trump” is pretty fucking persuasive to a lot of people… let’s hope that people haven’t forgotten what a dumpster fire trump was… the pandemic was years ago now, and people have a short memory

HTTPS is heavy when you’re talking about the extreme low power, bandwidth, and compute devices matter is intending to support

its also not a broadcast protocol - matter intends to connect many devices to many devices

those are off the top of my head; i’m sure there are more. HTTP is great, but new/alternate network protocols aren’t inherently bad: especially when you’re operating in a very constrained/niche environment

“health & education” is 13% of our total GDP, behind only mining at 14.6% (source: https://www.rba.gov.au/education/resources/snapshots/economy-composition-snapshot/)

so i’d say that whilst there are definite big problems, and direct economic output is a poor measure of what’s important in education i think that the amount of people that come here for education implies that we’re still doing relatively well

… or maybe there’s just inertia, reputation, geography (i know we get a lot of international students from asia - it’s possible that’s just because we are the closest western country and has nothing to do with quality)

i think it makes sense... that’s the pattern with a lot of FOSS but for-profit: make the hard (but generic) functionality FOSS and then make your “skin” that ties it all together, thing that makes it pretty, the differentiator closed and sell that

which shocks absolutely nobody

they can pretty easily serve a slightly different image for twitter only though

importantly though Beeper also built a lot of the bridges and maintain a lot more as FOSS

unsure about using a FOSS client with their service, but you can definitely use a FOSS client with their bridges that you host yourself and it’s functionally very similar AFAIK

i wouldn’t say minimal, but it certainly just works with no intervention once you set it up… not torrents; start on usenet and you’ll never look back!

mental health doesn’t mean you’re suicidal… maintaining mental health is about your whole life and is something you do every day

entertainment is mental health and mental health is just as important as physical health… don’t be so damn condescending!

nothing is forcing you to pay for every single one, correct… but actively managing subscriptions is a pain, and you don’t get to watch things as they come out so you don’t have that topic of conversation with people (sometimes)

meanwhile, piracy automatically downloads new episodes often mere hours after it’s released, for free, you don’t have to actively manage subscriptions, you don’t have to remember which service has what, there’s no concern that your favourite show is suddenly going to get removed from the platform

i’m happy to pay a subscription fee or 2, however i will absolutely not pay an exorbitant amount for an objectively worse experience… and when it hits that tipping point, well pirate all the things is the go

i think the distinction that either side is seeing here is that you think humans are inherently different to a neural network, where i think that the only difference is in the complexity: that if we had a neural network at the same scale as the human brain, that there’s nothing stopping those electronic neurons from connecting and responding in a way that’s indistinguishable from a human

the fact that we’re not there yet i don’t see as particularly relevant, because we’re talking about concepts rather than specifics… of course a LLM doesn’t display the same characteristics as a human: it’s not of the same scale, and the training is different but functionally there’s nothing different between chemical neurons firing and neurons made of transistors firing

we learn in the same way: by reinforcing connections between our neurons

it’s nothing like that at all… if someone bought a book and produced a big table of words and the likelihood that the next word would be followed by another word, that’s what we’re talking about: it’s abstract statistics

actually, that’s not even what we’re talking about… we then take that word table and then combine it with hundreds of thousands of other tables until the original is so far from the original as to be completely untraceable back to the original work

we output nothing other than what we’re trained on; the only difference is that we’re allowed to roam the world freely and consume whatever information we stumble on

what you say would be true if the LLM were only trained on content by the author seeking to say that their works had been infringed, however these LLMs include a lot of other data from public domain sources

one could consider these public domain sources and our experience of the world to be synonymous (and if you don’t i’d love to hear the distinction), in which case there’s some kind of a line that you seem to be drawing, and again i’d love to hear where you think that line is

is it just ratio? there’s precedent to that for sure: current law has fair use rules which stipulate things like “amount and substantiality”. in that case the question becomes one of defining the ratio. certainly the ratio of content that the author is referring to vs the content not trained by the author is minuscule

couldn’t agree more!

and if that is indeed the point: that the difference is simply size, then what does that law look like? surely it would need to specify a size of the relevant neural network that is able to derive works

but that’s then just an arbitrary number because we just don’t know what it would be

i think that’s a pretty good analogy that i haven’t heard before!