Interesting, that seems to be the reason for most. Under which circumstances if any would you upvote a perceived advertisement?
Would you upvote a well written advertisement that you think makes the company’s intention very clear to the reader? Would you do so if the intention not only sounded realistic, but also like they want to achieve something net-positive?
Or is it really just being an advertisement that makes you downvote?
There was a race to the bottom for SSD prices that ended roughly in July 2023, leading to losses with manufacturers having to sell under production cost; this is why NAND/SSD prices increased since then and will probably only slowly start to decrease at the end of 2024.
At the same time, there is very interesting technology in the making, I just read about SSDs with up to 1000 storage layers coming in the next few years.
Same goes for HDDs, although less so and prices seem more predictable there; my focus for the next few years would be completely new storage methods competing with HDDs/SSDs, but I don’t think any of this will reach consumer markets at competitive prices until 2028.
My prediction: HDDs will decrease like in the past years, SSDs will start really decreasing in price with the start of 2025 and it will take a few years for completely new storage methods to arrive.
Data is already plural, so the form datas does not exist.
It even has the rarely used singular datum as it is just Latin for "given", but using data instead is generally also regarded correct.
The point with EVs being over 45k is mostly the extremely pricey battery, China just subsidized until their cars are at a better price, the EU wants to protect European car manufacturers, that’s that.
You’re right, as far as I know we have not yet implemented systems to actively reduce similarity to specific works in the training data past a certain point, but if we chose to do so in the future this would raise the question of formalising when plagiarism starts; which I suspect to be challenging in the near future, as society seems to not yet have a uniform opinion on the matter.
Interesting take on LLMs, how are you so sure about that?
I mean I get it, current image gen models seem clearly uncreative, but at least the unrestricted versions of Bing Chat/ChatGPT leave some room for the possibility of creativity/general intelligence in future sufficiently large LLMs, at least to me.
So the question (again: to me) is not only "will LLM scale to (human level) general intelligence", but also "will we find something better than RLHF/LLMs/etc. before?".
I’m not sure on either, but asses roughly a 2/3 probability to the first and given the first event and AGI in reach in the next 8 years a comparatively small chance for the second event.
Firefox (idk about other browsers) also has a feature where you can right click the element on the website and directly make a screenshot just of this element, that should work as well.
Children will (on average) be a net-positive/taxed in the future, therefore societies incentivize having children by letting parents pay less taxes.
Also, children will completely form the society of the future, so different groups in a society having children is probably a good idea for a more diverse society in the future. As having children is expensive it is probably a good idea to let less wealthier people also have children, as you probably don’t want to just exclude them.
Interesting, that seems to be the reason for most. Under which circumstances if any would you upvote a perceived advertisement?
Would you upvote a well written advertisement that you think makes the company’s intention very clear to the reader? Would you do so if the intention not only sounded realistic, but also like they want to achieve something net-positive?
Or is it really just being an advertisement that makes you downvote?