yep I think so too. as I think I posted here a while back:
25068 + Oct 12 GitHub ( 20K) Your free GitHub Copilot access is ending soon
and now suddenly it's Launched Again! but with limits. gotta whet those appetites just a bit more! sales will totes follow soon!
been a little while since we had A Programming Dot Dev here, I think. guess it was time
it is funny as fuck, though
on which note: I would love to see a kind of "double-blind" experience where a pile of (ideally, more clever/clueful) muskrats get to interact with felon (without knowing that they are), and then watch the fallout as they all go "wtf is this dumbass I'm speaking to"
I'm thinking something in the survivor-y format of shows
probably wouldn't ever happen, felon's too fucking proud (and would 10000000% rig the game to own image advantage). but in a perfect world where this happened, oh wouldn't that just be some great television
I wish them a merry cable grounding fault and happy earth buzz to all
yeah, which is rather lol
"please believe in meeeeeeeeeee"
afaik it's not illegal but I have a strong feeling that quite a number of Typical OpenAI Practices And Behaviours are going to inform what becomes anathema and what becomes illegal in the coming years, because ho boy
you just really don’t get it, do you?
also, just ito "things to pick by which to point out dirtrag as a Shining Beacon", it's pretty fucking out there
5 posts and not a single sneer among them. dry out there today.
The syntax of a programming language you don’t know, and would be trivial to google
yeah so I tried that already, and it turns out these things are both dogshit and insidious in those cases - if I were a less informed user, I would've had bugs baked in at a deep level that would've taken hours to days to figure out down the line
it feels like throwing more hardware/data at it is no longer the correct answer
it was never the correct answer
Mainly the issue here is trust. You never know when LLMs switch from being a decent teacher to being a convincing liar. And that’s kinda the whole thing with teachers, you’re supposed to trust them
wat. I don't really understand this point/mention - what did you mean to convey by bringing this up?
You never know when LLMs switch from being a decent teacher to being a convincing liar.
well.. no? 1) it's always synthesising, there is no distinction between truth and falsehood. it is always creating something. some of it turns out to be factual (or factual enough) that you're parsing as "oh it gave me true bits", but that's because your brainmeats are doing some real fancy shit on the fly because they've been tuned to deal with information filtering over a couple millennia. handy, right?
but the LLM is much more likely to describe a common viewpoint that it’s been trained on a lot.
you mean the mass averaging machine is going to produce something that might be an average of the mass data? shock, horror!
why not just find a scientist to become friends with? it's so much easier (and you get to enjoy them going fully human nerdy about really cool niche shit)
The boot never likes hearing anything but “argggggh” or “ow that hurts”. Really weird, no-one has been able to figure it out!
I didn't even go exploring. on the one hand I feel this is good (in the sense that it didn't depress me even more), on the other it would've made the who clear earlier
I believe our esteemed poster was referencing the oft-seen cloud dynamic of “making just enough in margin” where you can tolerate a handful of big users because you have enough lower-usage subscribers in aggregate to counter the heavies. which, y’know, still requires the margin to exist in the first place
alas, hard to have margins in Setting The Money On Fire business models