Alex

You don’t think the creators should get paid? Do you know how much effort goes into making quality videos?

Ironically it’s probably because so many of the slop videos try and copy their style. However I would have thought YouTube would be more proactive with a channel with 25M subs.

Hmm I see nothing - I guess the posts don’t federate back to .ml?

I joined the .ml server because it was the dev server. Looking at the communities I subscribe to most are on other servers. Occasionally people ascribe beliefs to me based on my home server but so far I haven’t bothered looking for a new home.

When I first joined there were a bunch of popular instances that closed down so choosing a non-dev server seemed like a bit of a gamble. Same with mastodon servers.

On the other hand it’s legitimately one of the wonders of the digital world. A communally edited source of knowledge free for all to access. While it’s good to scrutinise foundations and how they are run I’ve not seen anyone propose a better solution so far. The data is freely licensed so forking is possible but it’s not really the technical details that make Wikipedia the resource it is today.

I think the two principle arguements he’s making are open weights allow for misaligned models and these models are using distillation to more efficiently train.

I don’t really care about the distillation point - it seems it’s just hoovering up the internet with extra steps. It’s really up to Anthropic to deal with by enforcing their ToS. Sauce for the goose etc…

I can see the argument about alignment but it’s not a new problem. In the FLOSS world we generally don’t put restrictions on use on the code we release even if it might get used for bad stuff. It certainly wouldn’t hurt for the authorities to test open models to find out where the guardrails are but ultimately rather than banning the tech you need to enforce the law against the people that use the tech to do bad stuff.

What do you need/use that you find in modern editors that you can’t get in something like Emacs? While there are AI integrations for Emacs they are all optional.

Just an early example of AI psychosis

I suspect it’s profitable in the abstract - and their accountants would be bad at their jobs if they couldn’t work out what utilisation rate you need to pay for the server runtime.

However how aggressively you amortise the cost of the training is the key, especially if you keep releasing new models every 6 months.

Invariably it’s having to scroll that’s the issue and you don’t want to be cross contaminating via your shiny black mirror.

Following recipes. These days I print them out because it’s a pain constantly washing your hands to check the next step on the phone. But I’m not buying smart glasses just that. My normal glasses are expensive enough already.

Because running servers costs money. The project I work on gets donations towards it’s CI costs and it’s not insignificant.

“Just going to pop outside to smoke a removed” would not raise eyebrows in the UK.

Issue triage, code exploration, extracting information from disparate sources, first pass code review. There are loads of use cases that it’s potentially useful.

For me it’s a lot better at extracting the requirements for a CPU feature from a 10,000 page architecture reference manual than I am.

I have API access at work because I don’t want to be tied to a UI. I’m very aware of the cost because I’m trying to see where it offers good value for money.

Of course things like the deep research and notebooklm are covered by the Google workplace fees which while including more than the personal plans are also a fair bit more expensive.

Your making a big assumption extrapolating from one particular study involving Java code and a static analyser.

How is that patch sloppy?

I feel the term slop is being overused to cover anything an LLM has touched. If I ask an agent to re-read a mail thread for me and apply the changes to my tree to review is that slop? Would you feel better about it if I copy and paste from email to code in my editor?

I’ve just been doing a bunch of bug triage which was mostly driven by the agent although I checked the issues where it had commented. Was that slop? Ironically a lot of the issues where AI generated although for the most part more complete than a lot of the purely human submissions we get. Are those bug reports slop? What about the poorly drafted human ones?

That’s not kernel policy but LF guidance. From the kernel’s point of view patches still have a high bar to pass to get merged and I don’t think we have enough data yet to see if LLM based submissions to the kernel have a higher or lower error rate than humans.

I certainly feel the uptick in LLM reports though - one of the projects I’m working on is seeing a deluge of them at the moment.

Where you live maybe. The NHS is centrally funded through taxation.

If course you do - if the cost of treating the patient down the line is going to cost you more. Public health systems have a vested interest in healthier citizens.