Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re: Not clean room (Score 1) 47

I don't think you understand the OPs point. LLMs are trained on everything the model creator can get their hands on. That means all Internet available open source (and many non-open source) code, including chardet. An existing AI can't perform a clean-room implementation because even if you don't show it the code, *it's already seen it*. And since the training data is encoded in the weights in a very non-trivial manner, you can't specifically remove a set of training data free the fact. You'd have to train a completely new model from scratch, with a dataset very carefully cleaned of any bits of the original project code. It's not impossible, but it would be hard, and vastly more expensive than hiring human coders to perform the clean room implementation.

Submission + - Companies are entitled to refunds for Trump tariffs 1

An anonymous reader writes: Companies are entitled to refunds for Trump tariffs struck down by Supreme Court, judge rules

“Companies in the U.S. that paid tariffs invalidated by the Supreme Court in February are legally entitled to refunds, a federal judge ruled on Wednesday.”

“Eaton was ruling specifically on a case brought by Atmus Filtration, a Nashville, Tennessee, company that makes filters and other filtration products, claiming a right to a tariff refund.”

Comment Re:"David vs. Goliath" struggle for identity (Score 1) 96

It's not injecting any wealth into rural communities. It's injecting wealth into a single or a small group of large landowners, who upon receiving said wealth will immediately pack up and move to a large city somewhere and live the high life until they go bankrupt a year later.

Comment Re: Obviously (Score 5, Interesting) 95

They can't just buy a looser fitting outfit, the outfits are regulated by the Olympic comittee. And according to the scientific study mentioned in the summary (you did read that, right?) the more fabric in the suit, the farther jumpers go. So, anything that adds material to the suit could (theoretically) provide an advantage. Are they actually doing this? Maybe. Olympic level athletes have been known to do some pretty insane things for even the tiniest advantage. I have no doubt some would try this if it provided an advantage (maybe even if they only thought it provided an advantage).

Comment Re: RFK numbers (Score 5, Insightful) 44

While I don't trust the CDC these days either, the numbers are for 2024, i.e. before Trump and his minions started their American fire sale. The numbers actually make Trump look pretty bad: not only due to the effects of COVID (which they claim wasn't a serious disease), but because the decrease in deaths from fentanyl shows that their entire "anti-drug" campaigns are horseshit, and that Biden-era policies were actually reducing deaths from drugs without engaging in wholesale slaughter of Venezualen fishermen or murdering nurses on the streets.

Comment Re: Corporations above the law (Score 3, Insightful) 23

Something isn't "transformative" when it can literally spit out the original work, word for word. Which it absolutely can with LLMs, because that's how they work. All they are, at heart, is a non-linear mathematical regression to a dataset, in this case the corpus of human writing. You can actually look at them as a lossy compression algorithm (technically *all* mathematical models are compression algorithms, after all, since the entire goal is to construct a model that can reproduce the input data set using relatively few parameters. They're just rarely looked at that way). The trained model literally contains a compressed (albeit to some extent lossy) version of the training data set. In some cases, it's not even all that lossy, as ChatGPT has spat out word-for-word reproductions of NYT articles, and image generators will sometimes reproduce watermarks from the source images.

Comment Re: Wear only cotton clothing. (Score 1) 24

It takes a large amount of pesticide to grow cotton, and the Boll Weevil has become resistant to most modern pesticides, which means you have to use really nasty ones to grow clothing-quality cotton. Those pesticides are not removed that thoroughly because, why bother when profits are on the line?

Comment Re: Do you also blame cancer victims? (Score 0) 175

Nah, that's all bullshit. You know how I know? Aside from personal experience, biology, and physics? Statistics. Obesity in the US has **tripled** in the past 60 years. It used to be roughly 1 in 10, now it's more than 1 in 3. That's not genetics: genetics doesn't change like that. That's behavior. It's food becoming so cheap even some of the poorest people can be gluttons. It's sugar being added to bread. It's food crafted not to satiate, but to be consumed. It's ads for Froot Loops targeted at kids. Now, is it easily to lose weight in that environment? Hell no. It's hard as hell. The entirety of the modern capitalist food production system is targeted at making you as fat as possible. But is it possible? Also yes. I mean, you yourself recognize that it's your behavior that keeps you just chubby. Just extrapolate that, and you'll see that you too could actually be skinny, if you wanted it badly enough. To be clear, I don't really blame people who have trouble losing weight. Like I said, lots of stuff is against you. But don't pretend that at the end of the day, it's not something you could change, if you wanted it badly enough. Genetics and environment and education can all make it harder, but they don't make it impossible.

Slashdot Top Deals

Contemptuous lights flashed flashed across the computer's console. -- Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Working...