ConceitedCode

I literally did that. It's been running for 45+ min. I gave up waiting.

I would rather have a standardized way of comparing these things like a list of prompts, code outputted and tokens used. I'm wasting way too much time trying to even get to a point to compare these tools.

I feel like I'm missing something. Every time I attempt something similar, I end up with something that looks reasonable but doesn't hold up to scrutiny. To me, it feels like the models have become great at making demos more so than "fully featured clones". Admittedly, these demos keep getting better.

I wish there was a more standardized way of sharing these prompts, results and token usage.

Sure, but what could graphene do in the meantime? It's either make it work for the moment or stop those apps from working today.

I'd like to see them lay more ground work for web apps but it's a tough spot and the easiest choice at the moment is to continue with AOSP.

I think graphene could maintain a hard fork with manufacturer support (Motorola). At least for a while. Long term viability is an open question.

What's the concern? They are working with Motorola as a manufacturer. It'll probably be a hard fork eventually but why not make it work in the meantime.

I feel like the much simpler explanation is that the US is winning because it's dumping the most money into it. By a very large margin.

I ran into the same issue with my play group. I told them that I will only learn 3 new games a year.

Since I added the rule about a decade ago, we've never once hit the 3 game limit. Just having the rule made them rethink if it was worth learning a new game or playing one we had a lot fun with already.

I suspect we'll address this by just going back to older ranking algorithms for search. We'll go back to the primary signal of good content being links from trusted sources.

People gaming the content based algorithms will eventually cause their own downfall.

Is an intel version of the 16 in the pipeline?