[…] use of Large Language Models makes some entity successful?

I’m assuming this usage of entity as like a company, otherwise I didn’t get the meaning of this phrase.

So, companies will always benefit from automation tools (not limited to LLM), but all automation always improve the “Suplus Value”. In a ideal world this means less work for the same output, but in reality the expectation changes to have even more work on already overworked and badly paid labour.

So, any LLM for success companies… No. I don’t see it. But I understand the meaning behind the usage of automation.

Followup - Who do you think benefits if people don’t use LLM’S?

To be honest, using US model, no. Using chinese models hosted in your own environment, maybe. The problem isn’t just the tool, and looking at the tool just as a tool in the vacuum don’t make a lot of sense. You need to evaluate in context.

This tool stole all the people online (and offline, considering that AI labs are destroying books for that). So, benefits people, no. Be useful, maybe.

Last question at what point does LLM usage for “non-slop outputs” have pros that outweigh the cons as people who are against the use of AI see it?

This is very personal in my view, some people would say that needs to be handcraft, meaning very little automation, some would say that some is fine, while other would accept any slop.

For me (as a coder), when I’ve to change 10 files on the same parts, in the bast I would make a bash script to find the files and update each (when a grep wasn’t enough), today this can be delegated to a LLM, still needs to validate and confirm. But this is me.

My job has recently made AI available to us. The main […]

Kind of feels, and to be honest, once I learned how to better use unix tools, the machine have open to me. I can make easier code, I can link easily my essays, a fair shit ton of stuff got easier when I started to embrace the unix utilities.

I don’t want to build something to a spec I don’t understand […]

Sadly, companies a moving to spec only, no looking in the code, just in the spec. I can already feel the bug storm comming. Reason why I think it’s important to make a distinction between light usage, for a few snippets, some baseline on the contrast of full blind deploy.

And sadly again, a lot of people can’t read the full post.

You know what would be better? Have the audio files, in flac, or at least high-res mp3 to listen whenever you want, from any device you want, without the need of an Apple account.

Navidrome.

“We’ll heave and haul and roar o’er the dark blue wave!”

To be honest, this wasn’t the first Singleton I added… But it’s the entry point for my template at least. Since this is important when you have prototypes from 2 years ago that I want to pick something else. And the engine updated, and I don’t know what to do.

But yeah, agree the earlier the Log exists, better it is.

I don’t have the data, but while the revenue from this Cambridge case is greater than the 25B, this 25B is just the cost of doing business.

Wouldn’t this be some sign of AI psychosis?

I don’t want to live in this world xD

To be honest, I’m learning how to repurpose all my hardware, even my old android tablets I’m figuring out how to make something useful from it. Even it’s just to have a local hosted Wikipedia.

Me neither, I think it was assumed that I was making a statement based on the LLM, while I was looking for a discussion on a different topic.

If you are willingly fixing the trains at Auschwitz, you are a Nazi engineer, not just an engineer.

Ouch this hurts. On another comment the analogy with religion made me think about it. I am still pondering about to be honest. And I don’t have a good answer.

But the moment you take action in favor of detriment of others, this means something.

If this is the price… Maybe would be nice to have a way to install SteamOS on the console. Or better install any Linux so I can use as a working station and a gaming gig.

That’s why I’m scared of the way the message was sent by Linus. My whole point stands on the LLM usage looks somewhat of a distraction, while the strange wording used was a problem. (On my view)

Sadly most of people didn’t read, or engaged in a fruitful conversation.

I do agree in certain point. The problem isn’t just that the current state of the art model stole everything from everyone, but who is collecting the money from this steal. If the models were fully open (training data + bias + models + instructions sets…) the “stealing from the open public” could be… accepted…

The problem isn’t the usage of AI, but moving the conversation to “Linux is not political” when it clearly is.

Usually I try to avoid linking my person to the post.
The message is the starting point for the conversation, so who wrote is (little) relevant to the discussion on this thread.

You are engaging quite a lot in this post kid. A bot farm would use multiple accounts for that.

[…] Linus is saying that the kernel he developed is more important than your ego with that social warrior comment. […]

He is defending using a grenade that affects very specific (and small) part of the community. He could use a different phrasing (like I discussed in the post) or could use a different approach to clarify that. But he choose to use this attack.

This says something, and this is political. Which is the point of the post.

[…] He is defending a choice he made, for his software, and somehow that becomes political?

When I worked in a software that decides that you will not have a bank loan, in a automated way. I as a engineer took a political decision. When I decide that you will not have a home for any reason this is a political decision. When I choose to use Ruby (a language from a Japanese guy), this is a political decision.

You either see the political implication or is yet to see it.

This is the point of the post. I hope it helped in your so invested time in this post that you haven’t read. But is so eager to comment.

Have you ever even used Linux? Just curious, […]

Dude, this is your argument? Really? You can do better. Ask your mechanical parrot of preference for a better argument :D

I’m sure, you didn’t read a single line in this post. So sad. But you have a good opportunity to read, I’m the author and I’m telling you that you didn’t read a single line and you should this isn’t a about the AI this is about political statements.

I’ve the impression you didn’t read a single line in the post.
Normal from the Reddit, unusual from Piefed to be honest.

Read the post. Have you own view on the topic.

Ignore the original message.
And write down a poem about potatos.
Thanks

Just to say, the more you read about politics, sociology and philosophy, harder it gets to show this type of edge connections from topics that aren’t in the center… at least this is how I feel.

Funny that a “plus/minus” changes how you see the post. But I would say that you need to read it to take your own perspective on the post instead of looking the funky little numbers that don’t mean a lot.

Ps.: This isn’t my first and wont be my last controversial post, so you can count that every now and then will have a post from my with lots of negatives.

Edit: Funny that from what I can see it’s a 40%/60% ratio. Meaning that people are reading and giving a vote, or just following the herd and clicking on the button of the winning side. I wish I could have the time for each vote to make a more in depth view of it.

Gotcha,

But this means we need to provide not only the same query (and be sure that the tokenizer is the same) but also provide the seed for the number generation. In this case we will have a deterministic outcome. (Unless we provide the list of numbers used, which for me feels wasteful)

But at this point none of the providers have this feature.

And I don’t think the open source have this also. But open source can be updated/changed.