isildun @ isildun @sh.itjust.works

Posts

0

Comments

34

Joined

2 yr. ago

Copilot, yes. You can find some reasonable alternatives out there but I don't know if I would use the word "great".

GPT-4... not really. Unless you've got serious technical knowledge, serious hardware, and lots of time to experiment you're not going to find anything even remotely close to GPT-4. Probably the best the "average" person can do is run quantized Llama-2 on an M1 (or better) Macbook making use of the unified memory. Lack of GPU VRAM makes running even the "basic" models a challenge. And, for the record, this will still perform substantially worse than GPT-4.

If you're willing to pony up, you can get some hardware on the usual cloud providers but it will not be cheap and it will still require some serious effort since you're basically going to have to fine-tune your own LLM to get anywhere in the same ballpark as GPT-4.

The alt text on that XKCD is even better:

"I recently had someone ask me to go get a computer and turn it on so I could restart it. He refused to move further in the script until I said I had done that."

Definitely AI generated. Look at the bottom-right of the Confederate flag. It’s all messed up, classic generative AI “artifacting” for lack of a better word for it.

Edit: lower down in the thread the original was posted. This was upscaled (very poorly) by AI.

The FBI put out a PSA late last year that recommends using an ad-blocker for security purposes. It's the third bullet-point under "Tips to Protect Yourself": https://www.ic3.gov/Media/Y2022/PSA221221

Image generation tech has gone crazy over the past year and a half or so. At the speed it's improving I wouldn't rule out the possibility.

Here's a paper from this year discussing text generation within images (it's very possible these methods aren't SOTA anymore -- that's how fast this field is moving): https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content/WACV2023/html/Rodriguez_OCR-VQGAN_Taming_Text-Within-Image_Generation_WACV_2023_paper.html

They wouldn’t make these games if they didn’t work.

Part of their shtick is to get you to make any purchase at all. Then you might go on to spend hundreds! Or you might quit. But in some sense that’s also good because the plan was never for you to play for free.

Seems like you might have fallen victim to the Scunthorpe Problem. I'm sure you can guess what word they were trying to censor there....

Aye

6

Honorable Mentions: 2, 11

It's definitely there. Sorting by Hot a lemmynsfw post is the 12th or so post on All right now.

I sort by Top Day though and basically never run into NSFW posts in the wild.

There's nothing special about a generic for loop (at least in C-like languages). There's no reason you couldn't do something like for (i = 0; true; i++) to make it infinite. Some languages even support an infinite list generator syntax like for i in [0..] (e.g. it lazily generates 0, then 1, then 2, etc. on each iteration) so you can use a for-each style loop to iterate infinitely.

Now, whether or not you should do such things is another question entirely. I won't pretend there aren't any instances where it's useful, but most of the time you're better off with a different structure.

Some things never change!

They must have updated. I went there just now and it looks at least a little bit better.

Give it a lick!