3 ms·

Where were the claims that this included "hard work", or any requirement that "hard work" be involved? "if all an application is doing is grabbing locally gene

Where were the claims that this included "hard work", or any requirement that "hard work" be involved? "if all an application is doing is grabbing locally generated input" demonstrates how little time you took to look over the repo, but feel free to be as offensive as you'd like. The application was built to be extensible, support local LLMs in the near future - when they're anywhere near as good as the black boxes that are readily available. It's a matter of practicality and it's apparently something lost on many.

lolinder 3y ago
There's a lot of interest in building fully local chat applications, and the people interested in those (myself included) are disproportionately likely to click on a submission advertising itself as an open source assistant. You're not wrong in your definition, but neither are we—there's a reason why F-Droid provides warning banners on apps that rely on proprietary APIs. A large portion of the free software movement would rather use an inferior free solution than one that is better but proprietary. That said, don't take the criticisms too much to heart—I think it's great that people are building things at all points on the free software spectrum.
emacsen 3y ago
By hard work, I mean the core computational functionality is being done not only by a black box, but by a black box that is openly hostile to private user generated information- something that a home assistant encourages through knowing what a user's preferences are for music, schedule, and so on. This is a common term of art. As for the issue of weather it's "lost on many", I can't speak for others, but I use proprietary LLMs for certain jobs- but I also understand the risk that I place on myself and others when I do so. On the other side, Voxos.ai's documentation's first section is entitled "Voxos [Beta Release] - Voice Your Desires"- voicing my desires would be to give them to a third party. It's a bad idea. And instead of simply acknowledging the issues and saying "Yes, we have plans for local LLMs" or "We're looking at a mix of rule based and LLM based systems in the future" or even saying nothing, your response is a mix of ridicule and derision. It's very telling.

lolinder 3y ago

There's a lot of interest in building fully local chat applications, and the people interested in those (myself included) are disproportionately likely to click on a submission advertising itself as an open source assistant. You're not wrong in your definition, but neither are we—there's a reason why F-Droid provides warning banners on apps that rely on proprietary APIs. A large portion of the free software movement would rather use an inferior free solution than one that is better but proprietary. That said, don't take the criticisms too much to heart—I think it's great that people are building things at all points on the free software spectrum.

emacsen 3y ago

By hard work, I mean the core computational functionality is being done not only by a black box, but by a black box that is openly hostile to private user generated information- something that a home assistant encourages through knowing what a user's preferences are for music, schedule, and so on. This is a common term of art. As for the issue of weather it's "lost on many", I can't speak for others, but I use proprietary LLMs for certain jobs- but I also understand the risk that I place on myself and others when I do so. On the other side, Voxos.ai's documentation's first section is entitled "Voxos [Beta Release] - Voice Your Desires"- voicing my desires would be to give them to a third party. It's a bad idea. And instead of simply acknowledging the issues and saying "Yes, we have plans for local LLMs" or "We're looking at a mix of rule based and LLM based systems in the future" or even saying nothing, your response is a mix of ridicule and derision. It's very telling.