Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Funny but serious (Score 2) 44

an amusing example of how training can go wrong

My understanding is that this isn't a consequence of a flawed training algorithm or process; it's instead a consequence of the limitations of LLMs, emergent from their training materials. It closely parallels another example I've seen around the net, that of asking an LLM about getting a car to the mechanic, noting it's a sunny day and the mechanic is just a block away, and having the LLM suggest walking... which is a consequence of the bias in training materials toward walking because lots of people make visible posts about their having done so (because it's looked on favorably), whereas people who drive short distances (of which there are many, probably outnumbering walkers) don't trumpet having done so online, leading LLMs to emit advice about walking when possible (and in the case of the mechanic example, having a lack of comprehension of the pivotal aspect of having the car make it with you to the mechanic's shop).

Comment Re:Mostly agreed, but... (Score 1) 53

It is sad to see an innovator lose out,

They were first to market, but I don't think of them as having invented the product.. The emergence of chatbots seems inevitable once the paper in 2017 was authored by several google engineers (titled "Attention is all you need")... it was just a question of exactly who and when. If OpenAI hadn't gone first, someone would have shortly after.

And, in a lot of ways even that google paper's "breakthrough" wasn't so much the tech (neural nets) but the precise adaptation of it that made it highly parallelizable.

And a necessary ingredient was tons of data, and processing power. So this couldn't have happened in a garage operation like the innovators of yore. And the biz models they're all coming up with are all cloud based -- not that I don't see the profit motivation, but so utterly to the exclusion of any offering that could guarantee privacy; all we "know" about chatbot conversation privacy is what each vendor claims at the moment,, which isn't much, wouldn't be verifiable if it was, and could change on a whim tomorrow.

For these reasons, I don't attach much "early innovator" romanticism to the players here.

Comment Re:Test This! (Score 1) 84

Whoa, we get it! Ads can be soooooo annoying. And speaking of 'lick my balls,' have you heard about The Lick-Ballz Ultimate Relaxation Kit? It’s the perfect way to tell stress and ads to just well, you know, buzz off. With soothing aromatherapy, stress balls (ironically), and a playlist that screams 'don’t bother me,' it’s everything you need to reclaim your peace. And because we really understand your pain, we’re offering a special deal—50% off your first kit if you use the code ‘F***IT’ at checkout! Hurry, reclaim your peace now!

Comment Don't call it a failure... (Score 1) 233

Don't call it a failure! I've been here for years
Rocking my subnets, putting v4 in tears
Making the packets rain down like a monsoon
Listen to the router go BOOM!
Explosions, overpowering the limit
128-bit towering throughput in it
Reach the summit, watch the NAT tables plummet
I'm gonna take the stack by storm and I’m just gettin' warm!

Comment Job ambitions (Score 1) 75

because careering neutrons leave no trace of their activity behind

It's always this. Neutrons are "the little MBAs" of the subatomic world, and they chew through role after role so quickly that it can be dizzing to trace. Compounding the issue is that most subatomic particles don't take the time to fill out their LinkedIn profiles.

Slashdot Top Deals

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Working...