2026iknewit

He created stuff while getting a lot of money for it.

Now he complains about it? Its just ignorant.

And he has apparently 10 millions and "the couple live both in the US and Australia.". So guess how often he flies around the globe. Guess how much real estate he occupies?

He isn't part of the solution, he is part of the problem.

I learned what i learned due to all the openess in software engineering and not because everyone put it behind a pay wall.

Might be because most of us got/gets payed well enough that this philosophy works well or because our industry is so young or because people writing code share good values.

It never worried me that a corp would make money out of some code i wrote and it still doesn't. AFter all, i'm able to write code because i get paid well writing code, which i do well because of open source. Companies always benefited from open source code attributed or not.

Now i use it to write more code.

I would argue though, I'm fine with that, to push for laws forcing models to be opened up after x years, but i would just prefer the open source / open community coming together and creating just better open models overall.

I wanted to write FBI Baboon

He worked in well paying jobs, probably traveles, has a car and a house and complains about toxic products etc.

Yes there has to be a discussion on this and yeah he might generally have the right mindset, but lets be honest here: No one of them would have developed any of it just for free.

We all are slaves to capitalism

and this is were my point comes: Extrem fast and massive automatisation around the globe might be the only think pushing us close enough to the edge that we all accept capitalisms end.

And yes i think it is still massivly beneficial that my open source code helped creating something which allows researchers to write easier and faster better code to push humanity forward. Or enables more people overall to have/gain access to writing code or the result of what writing code produces: Tools etc.

@Rob its spam, thats it. Get over it, you are rich and your riches did not came out of thin air.

Of course there is a process.

There was also a process on how to communicate top secret information, but these idiots prefered to use signal.

I'm completly lost on how you can be surprised by this at all? Trump is in there, tells some FBI faboon to black everything out, they collect a group of people they can find and start going through these files as fast as they can.

"When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king; the palace instead becomes a circus."

Don't get me wrong, i do not like it either but I do think often enough they do this for this kind of reasons and not to be dicks on purpose.

I'm lost on your comment.

Its like you have an agenda against LLMs by now marking them as 'semi-random' and undermining the complexity and the results we get from current LLMs.

Yes hyperspace: "Hyperspace is a concept from physics and science fiction referring to a higher-dimensional space"

I prefer to write hyperspace instead of n-dimensional.

Feel free to explain to me why you think my description is wrong.

LLMs are not non-deterministic in their nature. We add noise/randomess into specific layers to make them more 'creative'/'engaging' instead of always getting the exact same response we get variations.

Your whole sentence doesn't even contain a real description of what a LLM is. You say 'LLM are random LLMs'.

I explained that in a different comment already, feel free to check them out.

The Input of an LLM is real data. The n-dimensional space an LLM works in is a reflection of this. Statistical probably speaking there should be a way of knowing when an LLM is confident vs. when not.

This type of research is absolut valid.

An LLM is not just hallucinate.

This is still not true.

"Whenever they get something "right," it's literally by accident." "the random word generator"

First of, the input is not random at all which allows the question how random the output is.

Second, it compresses data which has an impact on that data. Probably cleaning or adjustment which should reduce 'random' even more. It compresses data from us into concepts. A high level concept is more robust than 'random'.

Thinking or reasoning models are also finetuning the response by walking the hyperspace and basically collecting and strengthening data.

We as humans do very similiar things and no one is calling us just random word predictors...

And because of this, "hallucinations -- plausible but factually incorrect outputs" is an absolut accurate description of what an LLM does when it response with a low probability output.

Humans also do this often enough btw.

Please stop saying an LLM is just a random word predictor.

Because people lie and still give you 1 star rating perhaps.

I believe its more about optimization for price and minimum amount of km you need to design something for.

And in regards of screws: If you have too many laypeople doing stupid shit for critical components, you might also think 'lets fix that by adding a barrier'.

There is an archive of a lot of television transmission in space.

archive.space

You just need to be traveling faster than the radio waves, catch up and enjoy :)

Yes but this is a different experiment