illiterate_coder @ illiterate_coder @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

6

Joined

2 yr. ago

Most of the people posting angry rants about this news are not Bambu owners. On the other hand, most Bambu owners have no idea anything has changed, because we didn't buy these printers to mod or install custom firmware on or use whatever slicer tickles our fancy this week, we bought them because they Just Work(tm), work great, and are very reliable. I owned a hobbyist machine before and I just don't have the time anymore. I knew exactly what tradeoff I was making when I purchased from them, so condescending assholes can keep their patronizing I Told You So to themselves: this is not for you, you have other options and that's OK.

Side note: I also run Windows and Linux on my PC. You can diss Windows all you want but it has its uses and you're not winning any friends outside the Linux circle jerk community by being a raging asshole about it. The Bambu hate feels exactly the same.

Commerce is just the exchange of goods and services. If we all stop exchanging goods, in what sense would we have a civilization? What would you or anyone accomplish if you had to grow your own food, make your own clothes, build your own house...?

I doubt anyone you are talking to is opposed to all human rights, that sounds very much like a straw man statement. Reasonable people can disagree about whether any particular right should be protected by law.

The reason is simple: any legally-protected right you have stands in direct opposition to some other right that I could have:

• Your right to free speech is necessarily limited by my right to, among other things, freedom from slander/libel, right to a fair trial, right to free and fair elections, right to not be defrauded, etc.
• Your right to bodily autonomy can conflict with my right to health and safety when there is a global pandemic spreading and you refuse vaccination.
• Your property rights are curtailed by rules against environmental harm, discrimination, insider trading, etc.

No right is ever meant to be or can be absolute, and not all good government policy is based on rights. Turning a policy argument into one about human rights is not generally going to win the other person over, it's akin to calling someone a racist because of their position on affirmative action. There's no rational discussion that can be had after that point.

I believe the answer is, unfortunately, no.

Long answer: In the past, an ML researcher trying to do this would have used either manual labels (for example a dictionary of parts of speech for each word) or multiple sub-models trained to solve each sub-problem before combining into a full prediction model, and even then performance is not great.

However, once the models grew to billions of parameters it turned out that none of this external linguistic knowledge is necessary and the model can learn it all on its own. But it takes billions to trillions of examples to learn all these weights, which means a double hit to the training time: each step is slower due to more parameters, and more steps are needed to train on the full dataset.

None of these models are trainable without a cluster of GPUs, which massively parallelizes the training process.

That doesn't mean you can't try, but my results training a small toy model from scratch for 20-30 hours on a consumer GPU have been underwhelming. You get some nearly-grammatical sentences but also a lot of garbage, repetition, and incoherence.

I suspect it's worse than that: most people have multiple natural talents they never discover. That is why I encourage my kids to try all kinds of experiences, and not label themselves as "not a science person" or "not outdoorsy". You don't need to be good at just one thing.

Didn't work! I used my identity matrix and I'm exactly the same as I was before.