1dom

3 ms·

1.
by 1dom 5d ago
I agree. There's definitely value in it. But I think you put it well that the problem is making it all accompanying. e.g. > Something that people learn quickly when they work with me is that my approach to pretty much every problem
2.
by 1dom 5d ago
This post has the same vibe as the best/worst of modern tech leadership principals. I feel these things are like a rorschach test for an individuals current position corporate psychopathy scale. There are times in my life where I'
3.
by 1dom 5d ago
If you can't state your point clearly, I'm not going to spend time trying to figure it out for you, sorry.
4.
by 1dom 5d ago
I think the negative impact lots of humans regularly experience from Google's approach to business is far more than the benefit of the very, very specific learning that "this idea doesn't make enough money for Google the way
5.
by 1dom 9d ago
Sorry, I don't understand your point. Can you state what actual point you're trying to make, rather than just picking each of my sentences and saying you're not so sure or you disagree? I could do the same to you, but it&#x27
6.
by 1dom 10d ago
> If by "this" you mean "an LLM [reproducing] copyrighted material No. I have absolutely no doubt that happens, and I'm not defending it or encouraging it. My point is whilst it technically might be illegal and happen
7.
by 1dom 10d ago
Because if it's feasible for any company with a war chest to start a court case about a competitor maybe having a matching line of code to theirs via an LLM, then basically every single company with a warchest would be at war with each
8.
by 1dom 10d ago
I'm fully aware of lots of times powerful companies have used the courts to protect their business. My point is basically all of the powerful companies are elbow deep in LLMs to the extent of some sort of mutually assured destruction i
9.
by 1dom 10d ago
The last post on HN I read was about someone using LLMs to reverse engineer an Apple GPU driver for linux in a month. The top comment points out how the poster must have had specialist internal domain specific contact with Apple. But then t
10.
by 1dom 10d ago
> If an LLM reproduces copyrighted material (which is very hard to verify) then the lawsuit from the copyright owner can still sink even robustly funded projects. Do you have many examples of this actually happening that you could share?
11.
by 1dom 11d ago
I think this is the definition of a polarising topic. It's very hard to hold a sensible middle ground without everyone wanting to take it to extremes of either "AI is just useless autocomplete" or "AI has solved software
12.
by 1dom 13d ago
> You may bristle and think the above is not true... Hehe, my undergrad was comp sci, I turned down an Oxbridge postgraduate in Advanced Computing Science to do an interdisiplinary PhD, technically in the social sciences department, beca
13.
by 1dom 14d ago
> I would argue that was an especially privileged moat over the last 20 years powered by the rise of FAANG. I agree. I was going to touch on this, but I was trying to practice smaller walls of text - I do think AI has merged/interac
14.
by 1dom 14d ago
> PS: You have intrinsic value, and your skills will also remain valuable, if even for how it teaches you to approach complex problems and think deeply. I appreciated this, but I feel the crux of the issue is this is only true with painf
15.
by 1dom 14d ago
I don't see it as "do a job because adding value" or "do a job because enjoying the activity". I think these discussions need to consider if we're speaking in a professional or personal context. Professionally,
16.
by 1dom 14d ago
Maybe we're about to test the scifi trope that a common enemy - like a superior invading alien life form - is the only thing that could unite all of humanity.
17.
by 1dom 14d ago
What are you on about? I'm not a mathematician, but I did a bit more Googling based on your comment, so happy to be corrected here. From what I understand, the solution OpenAI came out with might or might not have been informed or shap
18.
by 1dom 14d ago
I guess the issue is we don't have a solid definition of intelligence or AGI. If we did, there would be no reframing possible. It'd be nice to be able to say "being smart is x, the computers can do more x and faster than huma
19.
by 1dom 14d ago
> AI needs a lot of power, and AI can only (theoretically) breach & control what it can access through the internet. "AI needs a lot of power" depends on where you draw your lines. I can say a lightbulb needs a lot of powe
20.
by 1dom 14d ago
Sorry, I think you're being short sighted here. When I was a kid, I spent a lot of time rebuilding custom kernels and installing Puppy, DSL and other niche small operating systems on whatever random bits of hardware I could come across
21.
by 1dom 15d ago
I think you need to explain the solution you're thinking of in detail. "an RFC that gives parents the ability to communicate their underage child is using the device without revealing or verifying any further information." is
22.
by 1dom 15d ago
Yup, because if you had one, this post would have been the ideal opportunity to put it forward, but you just make some sassy "no u" comment instead.
23.
by 1dom 16d ago
FYI I stopped engaging with handfuloflight. I couldn't find a coherent argument or position through all the condescension and disagreement.
24.
by 1dom 17d ago
It's a strawman because it only makes sense if the one off up front cost is $50k, which wasn't the argument I was making. If the one-off up front cost is $20, then your point makes no sense - your boss would have no issue. An alte
25.
by 1dom 17d ago
The only reason my chair manufacturer would be entitled to the proceeds of my success whilst I was in their chair is if I hadn't already paid them for the work they put into making the chair for me. Even then, why would my success with
26.
by 1dom 17d ago
This seems like common sense. I guess it's not seen as common sense any more because the assumption is that all software is going to be using someone else's compute, or be connected to the internet and therefore require regular up
27.
by 1dom 17d ago
I think the issues you're describing are all modern internet software issues. I'd guess you're possibly a bit younger than me, or maybe forgotten how software worked before about 2010. - All compiled software is static. New v
28.
by 1dom 17d ago
This is a cool way of approaching AI models. I'm a big fan of local LLMs, local specific models like this should be even more powerful. > Every model is free up to 100k monthly active devices. No tokens, no logins. I dunno about the
29.
by 1dom 19d ago
Yeah, I totally agree. I think there's no 1-size-fit-all solution. I think the problem should shift onto "how many solutions do we need"? At least 2 I'd guess: 1 is going to be incomprehensibly hard and painful compared
30.
by 1dom 19d ago
All good thoughts, thanks for the response! Maybe the solution is in the offline world. A government funded public service announcement of tv/radio/print/busstop ads saying stuff like "never do government stuff not on .g

More ›