Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:They probably had incompetent people anyway... (Score 1) 51

At least with AI you can make it document the code it writes and the architecture.

Who was it who said that no documentation was better than incorrect documentation? Aside from you in the not-too-distant future, I mean.

Seriously, this is right up there with silly nonsense like "just have AI write the tests as well". It's like you hate your future self and want them to suffer.

Fortunately you can also tell it to evaluate and document the legacy code.

Yes, I suppose you can tell it to do that ... it's just not something that it can actually do.

Very helpful.

Is it really? Every AI fluffing article we've seen that makes those claims has, after even cursory examination, turned out to be complete horseshit. I suspect that, like most people who still have faith in magical AI, you're not paying too much attention to the output.

Comment Re:Where does the data live? (Score 4, Informative) 26

Thanks for your questions, Freenet caches data but it isn’t meant to be a long-term storage network. It’s better to think of it as a communication system. Data persists as long as at least one node remains subscribed to it. If nobody subscribes (including the author), it will eventually disappear from the network. So yes, if only your node subscribes then the data will only exist there and won’t be available when your machine is offline. But if other nodes subscribe it will be replicated automatically and remain available even if your node goes offline.

Submission + - New Freenet Network Launches With River Group Chat (freenet.org)

Sanity writes: Freenet’s new generation peer-to-peer network is now operational, along with the first application built on the network: a decentralized group chat system called River.

The new version is a complete redesign of the original project, focusing on real-time decentralized applications rather than static content distribution. Applications run as WebAssembly-based contracts across a small-world peer network, allowing software to operate directly on the network without centralized infrastructure.

An introductory video demonstrating the system is available on YouTube.

Slashdot previously covered the reboot of Freenet in 2023 in this article.

Comment Re:Can AIs read? (Score 1) 61

You claimed to be published in 2023

Okay? That's when it was accepted. It was printed/published in 2024. (I checked.) I also don't know what your "8 months" claim has to do with anything? Do you think that every paper takes years to produce? If you're tenure track, you're expected to publish 2-4 times a year. During active research, people/teams/groups can publish considerably more. I'd say that's just one more thing you don't know anything about, but we knew that about you already. Your ignorance knows no bounds!

If you believe that chain of argumentation makes your point stronger

You're pretty stupid, so I can only assume that you didn't understand the point I was making. (I must be feeling generous. It's obvious you didn't understand.)

That was obvious to anyone in any adjacent field.

Prove it then. In what "adjacent fields" was this common knowledge? How would you even know? Why is my post is the first time that fact was discussed anywhere online? (You know the reason, you just can't admit it to yourself.) Come on, little troll, show me this discussed anywhere before my post. You can't, of course, because your claim is nonsense and you know it.

The simple fact is that I am exactly what I say I am, a fact that is obvious to everyone, including you, and that makes you crazy. You can deny reality all you want, but it only makes you look even more foolish.

to be careful not to read their own feelings into the text

Oh, you silly little troll. you're not fooling anyone. Look at how much energy you've dumped into me, all because I hurt your feelings. You read every single one of my posts going back years, desperately looking for anything you could use denigrate me just to make yourself feel better. Remarkably consistent, aren't they? It's almost like I'm exactly what I claim to be.

If you think your posts make you look "clinical" and detached to the average reader, you're delusional. Well, even more delusional than I thought anyway.

Keep dancing for me, little troll!

Comment Re:Can AIs read? (Score 1) 61

This is clinical, not emotional.

Silly little troll. Your posts and bizarre obsession with me strongly suggest otherwise.

Your claim of being published was a mere 8 months

Sigh... While your ego depends on denying reality, I really am qualified. Yes, I missed the transformer revolution as I hadn't done any work in AI since ~2017 and was (foolishly) basing my comments then on what I expected the state of the field to be at that time. I had some catching up to do, sure, but it was hardly an impossible feat! The only thing I published in 2024 was indeed in AI, coauthored with a friend of mine, a sociologist, who reached out to me because of my background. I know that hurts your feelings, but you'll get over it.

how the thing that you were bashing someone for disagreeing with you, even fucking worked.

Silly little troll. Did you even read the comments you're so proud of finding? Nothing about the point I was making changes. If anything, it makes my case stronger.

The fucking revelation that training an LLM with LLM output will cause a degradation in the model? [...] You actually think that wasn't common knowledge?

Silly little troll. At the time, it was common knowledge among those of us actually in the field. It was not common knowledge among the rabble until the 'model collapse' paper was published. You can check the dates yourself against this comment. I'm reasonably certain that I point out the fact that this was common knowledge among those of us in the field at some point. You've read every one of my comments due to your weird obsession with me, so I'm sure you've seen it already.

I'm not going to dox myself, so that's as good as it gets. Good luck finding that discussed anywhere online before my comment was posted. Enjoy the inconvenient facts. At least you're young enough that you probably won't stroke out when you finally realize that you've been deluding yourself for months.

Like I said, let's dance, motherfucker.

Silly little troll. You're dancing for me just fine!

Wait, didn't you say this was "clinical"? There you go, contradicting yourself again.

Keep crying!

Comment Re:Can AIs read? (Score 1) 61

Oops! You've contradicted yourself. Too funny!

Did you know that I have immense power over you? It's true. Look how worked up you get. That's because of your bizarre obsession with me. Maybe your a masochist?

I have never met one who argued for years from an incorrect foundation without once bothering to actually educate themselves, which I have demonstrated that you have done.

You're delusional. You found one mistake on my part that was 1) not foundational in any way and 2) was later corrected. You, on the other had, have never once admitted error, even though the reason you're so obsessed with me is that I pointed out all the nonsense in just one of your posts. Pathetic.

As for my education, here's some food for thought: Since you've read every single one of my posts, do you remember the one where I offhandedly describe model collapse months before the paper that coined the term? How do you think I was able to do that? Am I psychic? Hmm... It couldn't possibly be that it was because I'm exactly what I say I am. I have a bad attitude, after all!

LOL! Enjoy fuming over that for the next few days. Oh, I can post a link for you, if you've forgotten ... or, more likely, you're desperately trying to forget.

Keep crying, little troll. It won't make you any less of a joke!

Comment Re:Can AIs read? (Score 1) 61

Oh, you poor deluded little troll. You can believe whatever nonsense makes you feel better. There are, however, a few facts that you can't change that clearly infuriate you. Let me point them out for you:

1. You used to admire me, until ...
2. ... I embarrassed you when I exposed your deep ignorance and lack of proper education.
3. I was only able to do that because, unlike you, I have an actual education.
4. I'm the same person I was when I was your hero.
5. You're still the same sad little troll you were then, aspiring to things well beyond your reach.

This is the big one:

6. You are still obsessed with me. It's sad, really.

every single fucking thing you've said over the last 5 years has shown to be wrong

Even you don't believe that. You're still fuming over the time I exposed your unfathomable ignorance! Seriously, seek help. You're unbalanced.

someone with your kind of attitude can't possibly produce useful scientific work

That's ... an interesting take. You don't know many educated people, do you?

Who am I kidding? Of course you don't!

Keep crying, little troll. Maybe someday you'll get over it.

Comment Re:Can AIs read? (Score 1) 61

The funniest part about your little tantrum is that while you don't know who I am (because psychos like you exist) you definitely know about something I've done.

Like I said. Cry harder, little troll. Pretending I'm not what I very obviously am won't make your life any better.

Also, I'm old. Four years is nothing. (You'll find that out someday if you somehow manage to avoid drowning yourself in the shower.) I wasn't doing any work in AI after 2017, so yes, I missed it. It happens. That doesn't change the fact that you still don't have a clue. That won't make your laughable post history any less embarrassing for you.

You should probably seek professional help. Your weird obsession with me isn't healthy.

Comment Re:Can AIs read? (Score 1) 61

Do you know why you have this weird and creepy obsession with me? It's easy enough to explain. You wish you were me. You wish you had my education and my accomplishments. You wish you could actually do the math, but you don't have the discipline or the intellect, just an over-inflated sense of your own capability. So you pretend that all that complicated stuff doesn't matter because you "understand the concepts", even when it's obvious to everyone else that you don't.

My guess is that you actually believed you were some genius self-taught expert. You can get away with that kind of delusion until as someone actually competent comes along and contradicts your silly nonsense and highlights your ignorance.

You can pretend all you want that I'm something other that what I am, but your sad little attempts to tear me down won't make elevate you or make your posts any less foolish.

I'd honestly feel bad for you if you weren't such a nasty little troll.

I don't lie about what I do, and what I'm proficient in.

A quick look at your posting history proves otherwise. (Projecting much?) From international politics to AI, it's like you get off on highlighting your deep ignorance.

You're such a joke. It's long past time for you to fuck off, little troll. No one cares about your bullshit.

Comment Re:Can AIs read? (Score 1) 61

Yep, I said something stupid years ago. You got me. I completely missed the transformer revolution as I wasn't working in the field at the time. I've since published in the field, a thing I can do because I have an actual education, unlike you.

I seriously doubt you want to play the stupid post game. As you know, because you're bizarrely obsessed with me, that isn't going to end well for you. You've proven time and again that you don't have even a basic understanding of, well, anything related to AI. You hate me because I've made that painfully obvious to anyone with the misfortune to stumble on your nonsense posts.

Like I said, cry harder little troll. No one cares about your bullshit. Pathetic.

Slashdot Top Deals

Science may someday discover what faith has always known.

Working...