When people are told what they can or they can't do. They are gonna complain about it. Abd they'll go somewhere else where they don't tell them what to do
My gf knows nothing about math. And has to learn a bit. I'm a software engineer so of course I offered to teach her.
Gave her some exercises to do. Because she prefers to do them alone without help. And after 30 minutes she's like "can you help me decipher what chatgpt told me?".
Of course, what chatgpt told her was utter garbage. Bruh, I'm right here and I'm teaching you, just ask me for help, not a word predictor.
I'm actually impressed how bad chatgpt answered, this was low high school level maths/physics. The bot is advertised as if it were going to leave me without a job in the next year.
Yes. Some mathematicians think that 0 is natural, others don't. So "natural number" is ambiguous.
In order to avoid ambiguity, instead of using fancy "N", you should use fancy "N0" to refer to {0,1,2,3,4,...} and "positive integers" to refer to {1,2,3,4,...}.
Definitely the worst part of working is to give up 8+ hours of your day. It doesn't matter if it's a trip or staying in the chair looking at a computer. You still took away 8+ hours of my life.
In fact, when I signed up for the job, I did so wanting to be hours sitting in a chair looking at the computer. Not for "socializing" or whatever. I would prefer another day in the chair, since that trip will just give me less time to meet my deadlines.
It is not only an issue due to forever growth. Birthrates are so low in some places (like Japan), that the new generations will just be crushed by the (economic) burden of the older ones.
Older people don't contribute much to the economy, but they spend a lot. It's just how it is. Older people are usually less healthy, and less healthy people eventually consume more resources than they can provide. This burden means that the younger generations will demand change to the government, and that will make retirement either worse or harder to achieve. Which will lead to the old days of working until you drop dead. Or distopian-like situations where old people willingly die to not be a burden, or even worse, they are killed by the government.
And as you say, immigration just fixes the short-term effects. That future is inevitable with birthrates so low.
Inmigrants usually adopt to the birthrate of the country very fast.
The exponential function has a single horizontal asymptote at y=0. Asymptotes at x=1 and x=-4 would be vertical. Exponential functions have no vertical asymptotes.
I don't think there's a clear definition of either. I'd say if it has no UI, it's a program. And if it has a UI, I don't know if it's a program or an app.
I believe this is the same people that will respond "not now, I'm in a meeting". I know you're in a meeting. It's called asynchronous communication. I can message you whenever I want, and you can read and reply whenever you want. The messages won't go away.
Or even worse "I have not arrived at the office yet". Then don't fucking read teams.
Carbon taxes still allow you to waste as much energy as you want. It just makes it more expensive. The objective is to put a limit on how much they are allowed to waste.
I'm not a lawyer. I don't know how to make a law without possible exploits, but i don't think it would be hard for an actual lawyer to make a law with this spirit that is not easily avoided.
Energy consumption limit. Every AI product has a consumption limit of X GJ. After that, the server just shuts off.
The limit should be high enough to not discourage research that would make generative AI more energy efficient, but it should be low enough that commercial users would be paying a heavy price for their waste of energy usage.
Additionally, data usage consent for generative AI should be opt-in. Not opt-out.
I don't think Microsoft invented scrapping. Or LLM training.
Also, GitHub doesn't have an issue with Microsoft scraping its data. They can just directly access whatever data they want. And rate-limiting non logged in accounts won't affect Microsoft's LLM training at all.
I'm not defending a monopolist because of monopolist actions. First of all because GitHub doesn't have any kind of monopoly. There are plenty of git forges. And second of all. How does this make their position on the market stronger? If anything, it makes it weaker.
No. I cannot find the flaws in my reasoning. Because you are not attacking my reasoning, you are saying that i am on the side of the bad people, and the bad people are bad, and you are opposed to the bad people, therefore you are right.
The world is more than black or white. GitHub rate-limiting non-logged-in users makes sense, and is the expected result in the age of web scrapping LLM training.
Yes, the parent company of GitHub also does web scrapped for the purpose of training LLMs. I don't see what that has to do with defending themselves from other scrappers.
When people are told what they can or they can't do. They are gonna complain about it. Abd they'll go somewhere else where they don't tell them what to do