estebarb
Joined 10 years ago
Karma
1,294
Submissions
342
Member since
Nov 30
Recent submissions
Comment · 1 month ago
Comment · 1 month ago
I dislike this approach. In my opinion it is much useful a 1x/2x billing based on hour like Deepseek does. Being unable to use it at the hours I need it makes me want to remove the service, not upgrading it.
Comment · 2 months ago
Now, if I could afford 4...
Comment · 2 months ago
That is how you get a hardware provider to stop selling you stuff
Comment · 2 months ago
Personally I have been using Deepseek V4 flash and it is enough for my needs. You can use OpenCode Zen/Go and also get access to many other models, including OpenAI ones. Writing purpose specific agents can make cheaper models close the intelligence gap with the most expensive ones
Comment · 2 months ago
I'm suspecting it is Deepseek flash-vision-exp V4
Comment · 2 months ago
What happens if we train models (GPT or human students) using the outputs of a model with text havingbthose watermarks? Is there something preventing the watermark from being learnable?
Comment · 2 months ago
I prefer V4 flash, but Luna is ok and included in the OpenAI plan I'm already paying, so... that is the reason I use it.
I gave DeepSeek $50 around june, and I haven't been able to exhaust them yet. The model is super cheap and more than enough for my needs.
I'm my opinion, Flash V4 is less pedantic than OpenAI models, less prone to unsolicited prescriptions and less prone to "helpfully" reinterpreting my instructions (wrongly, of course).
Comment · 2 months ago
I practically switched to doing everything with Luna or DeepSeek V4 flash. I haven't feel the need for the more expensive models.
Comment · 2 months ago
Language distribution shifts. Eventually people will start adopting the distribution used by LLMs, making classification harder.
Also, this doesn't even consider the case where people use LLMs to translate their original works. Or people that use it for spelling/grammar checks.
Personally, I believe these checkers do more harm than good. Any false positive can ruin someones life.
Comment · 3 months ago
This will cause cognitive debt anyway. As mentioned in https://arxiv.org/pdf/2509.21972v1: "When students rely
on these outputs as a substitute for their own reasoning or critical engagement, the learning process is fundamentally
compromised. Genuine learning requires the active construction of meaning, integration of knowledge, and reflective
engagement with content. These processes cannot occur through passive consumption of syntactically correct but
semantically hollow responses. Without this deeper cognitive work, learners risk mistaking linguistic fluency for
understanding, thereby undermining the very goals of education".
Personally, I don't think we will ever be able to reconcile using LLMs and cognitive debt. Even before LLMs we were aware if it: we knew people moving to managerial/PM roles eventually get their coding skills rusted. Well, now we are all in those managerial roles...
Comment · 3 months ago
Oh wow, even scammers care about usability and their employees' well-being. What's the excuse for bad UX in internal company software?
Comment · 3 months ago
I'm really not sure how this would work. I don't know how the ACM works, but in IEEE you would have to give them your publishing rights. However, training a LLM is not publishing by itself, it is a derivative work? Any way, at this point authors should be entitled to monetary compensation, not the publisher. The deal is totally different.
Comment · 3 months ago
Session cookies do not require a banner.
Comment · 3 months ago
Moving money around is harder than it seems
Google Chrome keeps insisting that Spanish is Galician. PowerPoint insists on changing the spell checker back to the wrong language and ignores setting the language for the whole presentation. On Linux, ChatGPT insists it must enable the spell checker in the local system language, so everything is always red.
Privacy aside, a lot of software seems to be built assuming people cannot be multilingual.