TehPers

Because his name is Andrew and the other guy’s name is Zohran.

And yes, I’ve met people who vote this way.

I bought a license many, many years ago and loved SmartGit. I just use the cli now, but if you’re looking for a GUI, it’s a great choice.

Found you one.

While interesting, can you provide a credible source for the image? I’m not doubting that they have concepts of a plan but would certainly like to see where the image came from.

It’s not really (which says more about corporations than anything).

Yep! You would need not only an AI superintelligence capable of reflecting and adapting, but legislation which holds liable those superintelligences and grants them the rights and obligations of a human. Because there is no concept of reward of punishment to a LLM, they can never be replacements for people.

Bootstrap sellers are going to be booming soon.

There is a fundamental limitation of all LLMs that prevents it from doing as much as you might think, regardless of how accurate they are (and they are not):

LLMs cannot take liability. When they make mistakes, they cannot take responsibility for those mistakes. The person who used the LLM will always be liable instead.

So any automation as a result of LLMs removing jobs will end up punting that liability to the next person up the chain. Management will literally have nobody to blame but themselves, and that’s their worst nightmare.

Anyway, this is of course assuming capabilities that don’t exist.

The conclusion of this experiment is objectively wrong when generalized. At work, to my disappointment, we have been trying for years to make this work, and it has been failure after failure (and I wish we’d just stop, but eventually we moved to more useful stuff like building tools adjacent to the problem, which is honestly the only reason I stuck around).

There are a couple reasons why this problem cannot succeed:

1. The outputs of LLMs are nondeterministic. Most problems require determinism. For example, REST API standards require idempotency from some kinds of requests, and a LLM without a fixed seed and a temperature of 0 will return different responses at least some of the time.
2. Most real-world problems are not simple input-output machines. When calling, let’s say for example, an API to post a message to Lemmy, that endpoint does a lot of work. It needs to store the message in the darabase, federate the message, and verify that the message is safe. It also needs to validate the user’s credential before all of this, and it needs to record telemetry for observability purposes. LLMs are not able to do all this. They might, if you’re really lucky, be able to generate code that does this, but a single LLM call can’t do it by itself.
3. Some real world problems operate on unbounded input sizes. Context sizes are constrained and as currently designed cannot handle unbounded inputs. See signal processing for an example of this, and for an example of a problem a LLM cannot solve because it cannot receive the input.
4. LLM outputs cannot be deterministically improved. You can make changes to prompts and so on but the output will not monotonically improve when doing this. Improving one result often means sacrificing another result.
5. The kinds of models you want to run are not in your control. Using Claude? K Anthropic updated the model and now your outputs all changed and you need to update your prompts again. This fucked us over many times.

The list keeps going on. My suggestion? Just don’t. You’ll spend less time implementing the thing than trying to get an LLM to do it. You’ll save operating expenses. You’ll be less of an asshole.

Graham Platner isn’t an elected official, nor are any of the three legislators named Graham Platner, nor are any of Louis Rossman’s other names Graham Platner.

Please, if you’re going to troll, make a better attempt at it. Or even better, take it somewhere else.

He literally put out a video not that long ago praising three democratic legislators for proposing a right to repair bill. Weird impression.

By “crackers” I mean “black hat hackers”.

Ok I just misread it then, sorry!

What they’re doing should be outright illegal in most countries; it’s equivalent to changing a contract unilaterally after both parties signed it.

Update to [COMPANY NAME]'s Policies

Yes, this should be illegal, but it’s already common practice. I’m just hoping that enough of this will eventually get people to stop buying these products, and hopefully we can start seeing some real legislation against it in some countries.

Additionally, I’d strongly advise against buying any sort of “smart” device, unless you’re pretty sure the benefits of connecting your toaster to the internet outweighs all the risks.

This should be obvious at this point. “Smart” just means “internet-connected”, and we already know what happens to every device that connects to a remote server during regular operation: telemetry (and not the nice debugging kind but the “what do you use” kind), and advertisements.

Including corporations and crackers

The “crackers” part of this confuses me. Samsung is a Korean company. The chairman’s name is Lee Jae-yong (이재용). Samsung NA’s CEO is Yoonie Joung. Maybe I’m misreading this?

My high school had more strict passing requirements for PE. Not to be ableist or anything, but the physical portion of this test is a pretty low bar for most able-bodied remotely fit people.

As for the drug test portion, this is actually probably the hardest requirement. I’ve seen how strict the drug testing requirement is, and even recreational use of weed can screw you on those tests for longer than you’d think.

Still wildly different than here where people just campaign on hatred and get people to vote for them.

Defending. It says in the article what I’m referring to, since that’s all the context I have on this.

The fact that the far right candidate was standing up to LGBTQ+ rights speaks louder than anything to me. I already loved NL, and this just cements it.

Shame I’m an entire ocean away or I’d be there all the time.

To me, as an American, having a young president might even be more newsworthy.

We don’t know what presidents do behind closed doors. What I do know is what some of that demographic that I know has done behind closed doors, and let’s just say I’d be shocked if any future president was truly the first one to be gay (or at least not completely straight).

As far as NL goes, I love it there. Genuinely nobody I interacted with cared at all how you identify. They just want to get it right. I think the biggest issue I’ve seen there is regarding transgender people, but the scale isn’t even on the same planet as it is in the US, and reaching that point would be a monumental milestone here worthy of a national holiday.

This seems entirely tangential to the thread. At least from what I’m reading, they’re discussing whether Britain and Germany allow freedom of speech. Nobody in the thread seems to be talking about MS’s stance.

I think the statement that Microsoft is not your friend is noncontroversial, a given, and applies to every large corporation on the planet.

I recommend you look into Minecraft specifically because the model has its quirks.

I’m familiar. The first server I hosted was an alpha hmod server for some friends, and I’ve played a lot since then.

What MS is doing doesn’t prevent anyone from connecting to a server. It only puts a wall in the way, saying essentially to both the host and the players that this server violates MS’s terms for hosting, but not preventing them from doing so. Server owners can bypass this restriction in a few minutes with a single restart (assuming they aren’t using a modded server that can apply the change at runtime).

This isn’t unique to Minecraft. Games have supported custom servers for as long as I’ve been alive, and more recently as software became more and more internet-connected, restrictions on those servers have also been enforced. Being self-hosted or a custom lobby on a game doesn’t change this - the server software is still owned by MS and licensed to the users.

If anything, that it is so easy to bypass this shows that it’s nothing more than signaling. I would be much more concerned if the solution weren’t simply to change online mode to false. Sure moderation is another story, but there are alternative solutions, like IP banning.

Also, Mojang/Microsoft should be seen as an enemy of the common people for many reasons - including their Copilot AI. If the Chat Reports feature (where purchased accounts are neutered because of automated chat reports) isn’t reason enough to dislike Microsoft, consider the following: The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

There are many, many reasons to dislike Microsoft. They have made many terrible decisions in the past, ethically speaking. This does not implicitly mean that every decision they make is bad or harmful. It only raises the question of intent behind decisions, and here the intent seems clear to me: they do not want their brand associated with the kind of speech allowed on that server.