just another dev @ admin @lemmy.my-box.dev

Posts

1

Comments

582

Joined

2 yr. ago

128k token context is pretty sweet. Mistral nemo also just launched with a similar context. Good times.

The problem with LLMs is that they require immense compute power.

To train. But you can run a relatively simple one like phi-3 on quite modest hardware.

It is my understanding that this driver had not been (re) certified by Microsoft, though. So in that case, I stand by my statement.

If it had been, I'd agree with that blame.

^ Mocks people for using the default, then proceeds to not give alternatives they deem better.

Fortunately, the 2 people they are suing have been identified.

One of them actively drove their car into them, and tried to pin it on the waymo, and the other goes around slashing tires (and is claimed to have mental issues, which does make it more sucky if true).

My answer might surprise you, but no. Your source code, your binary, your responsibility. Not that of the platform, the compiler, or the company that supplies it.

Gotcha.

I fully agree with you on that front, but ads have nothing to do with kernel access, so how is that relevant to their legal requirements?

I disagree. As someone else in this thread said: if you compile a buggy Linux driver that crashes the system, it's still the fault of the driver.

Personally, I don't see the issue. Microsoft shouldn't be responsible for when a third party creates a buggy kernel module.

And when you, as a company, decide to effectively install a low-level rootkit on all your machines in hopes that it will protect you against whatever, you accept the potential side effects. Last week, those side effects occurred.

We all hate Microsoft for turning Windows into an ad platform but they aren't wrong.

Sorry, how is that related to the stability of the kernel?

Err...what's the point of this 6 year old article, OP? Are there any specific issues about it that make it relevant now or that you wish to discuss? If so, if would help if you'd put them in the post.

Hey, you do you. I just want to give you the feedback that when you repeatedly post something as blatant as a full page screenshot, it really stands out, especially on mobile. It might give off some fanatical vibes (in the original sense of the word).

Do with that what you will.

You sure like posting that screenshot, don't you?

The world wide web is more than social media.

Why?

Once this passes, OpenAI can't build ChatGPT on the same ("stolen") dataset. How does that cement their position?

Taking someone's creation (without their permission) and turning it into a commercial venture, without giving payment or even attribution is immoral.

If a creator (in the widest meaning of the word) is fine with their works being used as such - great, go ahead. But otherwise you'll just have to wait before the work becomes public domain (which obviously does not mean publicly available).

I don't think so either, but to me that is the purpose.

Somewhere between small time personal-use ML and commercial exploitation, there should be ethical sourcing of input data, rather than the current method of "scrape all you can find, fuck copyright" that OpenAI & co are getting away with.

I think you'll get to hold on to that feeling.