I see a fair few comments about this quite frequently, and I completely agree - there’s a lot of video content that is better off as a written piece. Not everyone wants to sit through 10-15 mins of video that they could have skimmed or read in 2
Please cite these rules (eg Rule #3 blah blah blah). Orherwise, I and others who werent there have no idea what youre talking about and its de facto unrelatable or insccessible
Tbh this rule hasn’t been an issue for me. I cite him for his quote on politics and I still respect a lot of the geniuses who work for him. I really don’t share his views, but ppl can be skilled and still suck with what they’re saying. I love PCs and the internet, but ppl will never be binary.
I have been curating my experience on lemmy by muting communities I don’t care for like politics, sports, some Linux communities, and also I always filter NSFW.
I have never been happier because I don’t see what I don’t care for.
Don’t be anywhere near the center. Don’t make any arguments about corporations providing value. Don’t try to report violent tankie content. Don’t point out that lemmy is just going to end up like forums because of power mods and admins defeding people they don’t like. And don’t call piracy stealing. People really don’t like when you call them thieves.
The companies should make it nice and easy for us to watch everything in one place, in high quality, from any device, for nice and cheap! …oh, that was Netflix a decade ago ☹️
Pretty difficult to convince the likes of minds on Lemmy to pay $100 for every streaming service in the world - to get a pretty awful experience, when you can get a much, much better experience without giving up your hard earned $$
I will fly my flag high for the free seas 🏴☠️🏴☠️🚢
Know what you are doing and own it. You don’t like the means of distribution or price and you are stealing the right to distribution from them and very much taking money out of someone’s paycheck.
My position is I’ll pay for it within reason but at some point it’s ridiculous. Like I can’t really be bothered to pay for all of Apple TV just so I can watch For All Mankind it’s not worth it.
I don’t believe that and I patronize content producers. I think we can find better ways to reward inventors and creators, ways that don’t just benefit corps and the politicians they pay off.
Content is key. And you are a large-scale provider, so many thanks! I know you’re just a regular person (although there is a non-zero chance you’re actually Obama) but we just appreciate you
Poe’e law states that there’s no such thing as satire, and that every post that could be considered a joke is actually a display of incredible stupidity
Not really. Poe’s Law just states that extremist positions are often impossible to distinguish from satire. It doesn’t say that there’s no such thing as satire.
That’s why I append my sarcastic posts with /s. It’s a habit I picked up on Reddit where you could easily see someone posting that same comment, but being 100% serious. The /s kind of ruins the joke, but I’d rather the joke be ruined than have people think I was serious when I said those kinds of things.
The word has different meanings in different contexts. That said, unless you’re a complete moron, it’s usually very easy to figure out what sense of “liberalism” is intended based on context.
What I have no patience for at all are the insufferable idiots who insist that only one definition is correct, and oh by the way, it just happens to be their definition.
You really do have to pretend that they’re insignificant.
They’re extremely significant. Overhyped? Maybe, but extremely significant nonetheless. I think a lot of people here have gone “well, if it’s overhyped, that means it isn’t even vaguely interesting” and I think the real truth, as much as I hate centrism, is in the middle.
What one would think is ai today is not really i. Chatgpt does not understand what it’s talking about and definitively can not lead the machine uprising. Straight up neural networks maybe could, but they’d need magnitudes more computing power then we have now. We would need a new ai for it to be practical.
In my experience gpt-s are more like “what are some examples of x” then “can you solve this problem”. Because the problems are either easy to google or, for the harder problems, gpt straight up lies or rambles uselessly. A search engine helper, in a way.
I’d rather we put all those MWh into solving real problems, instead of startups. Also; Nvidia, fuck you.
I think LLM’s are on the right track, while an LLM with its current architecture likely couldn’t without a ridiculous scale, they do show signs of understanding ( businessinsider.com/chatgpt-open-ai-balancing-tas… ), pretending they are nothing more than autocompletes as the people here do is disingenuous, what it does is predict, and while that’s all it does, that’s also all that makes humans special, the human mind is an object that takes sensory input, and predicts what muscle movements would be best given the sensory input, in fact, our heavy reliance on prediction is the reason magic tricks fool us, the only way to accurately predict things is through reasoning and understanding, we don’t know what happens when we scale, and there’s a reason experts predictions of when AGI will come are getting closer and closer, right before the LLM boom the average prediction was something like 40 years (based on memory), now it’s like, 10.
I consider an LLM to be akin to what would happen if a persons thoughts were immediately transformed into words, without any layer of verification, you think plenty of wrong things, but you don’t say the wrong things you think because you have a layer of verification before speech, and it turns out, according to recent research, adding a verification layer to LLM’s is extremely potent: arxiv.org/abs/2203.14465
It seems, according to this paper, that the trick is to have an LLM generate thousands of possible outputs, and have a separate tool verify their correctness, and then only present the correct output, this could possibly solve hallucination, which is one of the biggest roadblocks to actual intelligence.
While we aren’t at true intelligence yet, we are creating the building blocks that will allow for it, and it will happen, and the experts believe it’s coming soon, LLM’s are not insignificant in terms of progress.
These are tools made of the same component parts as our brain, admittedly, it takes approximately one thousand artificial neurons to simulate a real neuron, but the fact of the matter is, our minds are quite similar to these artificial minds, the artificial minds are just much, much, much, much more simple, it turns out, intelligence is likely a matter of statistical analysis.
When you look at a coffe cup from the side, you know it has a hole in it. Because you imagine, not because it’s a reflex.
LLM is basically a point cloud of words. The training uses neural networks and thus pattern recognition. But the llm itself is closer to a database. But hey, sql is also useful for ai (data storage/retrival according to logic).
I’m not an llm expert, by far. But right now they are not much more practical then a find out a bout things helper.
Edit: I do like them. It’s been helpful a couple times and i even got gpt4all installed on my computer for fun.
When you look at a coffe cup from the side, you know it has a hole in it. Because you imagine, not because it’s a reflex.
You’re looking at this backwards, you know those things because of previous experiences, you predict this might happen due to those.
This is still a matter of prediction, and if that had never happened to you even once, I guarantee you wouldn’t look for it.
They’re also significantly smaller than our brains and multimodality has been shown to help with reasoning, so, considering they’re text only and significantly smaller than our brains, their significantly reduced functionality is to be expected. Especially when you factor in that our brain has verification layers, which have only recently been discovered to work for LLM’s, none of them even implement this yet as far as i’m aware.
Add comment