@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

admin

@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

It also works great for book or movie recommendations, and I think a lot of gpu resources are spent on text roleplay.

Or you could, you know, ask it if gasoline is useful for food recipes and then make a clickbait article about how useless LLMs are.

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

It should not be used to replace programmers. But it can be very useful when used by programmers who know what they’re doing. (“do you see any flaws in this code?” / “what could be useful approaches to tackle X, given constraints A, B and C?”). At worst, it can be used as rubber duck debugging that sometimes gives useful advice or when no coworker is available.

admin, (edited )
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

Yeah, I saw. But when I’m stuck on a programming issue, I have a couple of options:

  • ask an LLM that I can explain the issue to, correct my prompt a couple of times when it’s getting things wrong, and then press retry a couple of times to get something useful.
  • ask online and wait. Hoping that some day, somebody will come along that has the knowledge and the time to answer.

Sure, LLMs may not be perfect, but not having them as an option is worse, and way slower.

In my experience - even when the code it generates is wrong, it will still send you in the right direction concerning the approach. And if it keeps spewing out nonsense, that’s usually an indication that what you want is not possible.

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

That’s what I meant by saying you shouldn’t use it to replace programmers, but to complement them. You should still have code reviews, but if it can pick up issues before it gets to that stage, it will save time for all involved.

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

I agree it’s being overused, just for the sake of it. On the other hand, I think right now we’re in the discovery phase - we’ll find out out pretty soon what it’s good at, and what it isn’t, and correct for that. The things that it IS good at will all benefit from it.

Articles like these, cherry picked examples where it gives terribly wrong answers, are great for entertainment, and as a reminder that generated content should not be relied on without critical thinking. But it’s not the whole picture, and should not be used to write off the technology itself.

(as a side note, I do have issues with how training data is gathered without consent of its creators, but that’s a separate concern from its application)

ChatGPT Answers Programming Questions Incorrectly 52% of the Time: Study (gizmodo.com)

The research from Purdue University, first spotted by news outlet Futurism, was presented earlier this month at the Computer-Human Interaction Conference in Hawaii and looked at 517 programming questions on Stack Overflow that were then fed to ChatGPT....

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

ChatGPT is not good enough to use as a substitute for (whatever), but can be a useful tool for someone who can quantify its output.

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

This guy gets it.

Google Search’s “udm=14” trick lets you kill AI search for good | Ars Technica (arstechnica.com)

Tack “&udm=14” on to the end of a normal search, and you’ll be booted into the clean 10 blue links interface. While Google might not let you set this as a default, if you have a way to automatically edit the Google search URL, you can create your own defaults.

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

I think they provide a very reasonable reality check / a bit of reflection. And it sounds like you could use one, if you’re surprised that Facebook still exists.

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

Thanks, that’s a relief!

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

Counter point: Poe’s law.

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

That’s a use. But not their only use.

Linus Tech Tips (LTT) release investigation results on former accusations (x.com)

There were a series of accusations about our company last August from a former employee. Immediately following these accusations, LMG hired Roper Greyell - a large Vancouver-based law firm specializing in labor and employment law, to conduct a third-party investigation. Their website describes them as “one of the largest...

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

Same. While Linus is part of the problem for using practices he claims to disagree with, I’d rather be part of the solution by not rewarding it with attention.

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

TLDR: nothing new in this article from what we heard earlier this week.

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

The scary thing is, even when there is a button “only required” right next to it, it’s scary how many people automatically click “accept all”. Even among tech-savy people.

The conditioning is frightening.

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

Take it away, Betteridge.

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

I checked the report, but it seems at no point it seems to clarify what they consider “bot traffic”. Is it measured in api calls, page views, or bytes? Generally the term traffic is meant as raw data transported, but in that context those numbers make no sense.

For example, one of the biggest traffic consumers in the Internet is video streaming. There’s no way in hell that half, or even a tenth, of that data is fake - it would simply cost too much to waste it on bots. Both for the bot owners as well as the streaming providers.

This level of vagueness and lack of transparency (what do the numbers mean, and where do they come from) does not fill me with confidence on this report.

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

And then they started putting ads for subscriptions in the os.

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

Without datamining and that works out of the box? Please let us know when you find out.

admin, (edited )
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

Counterpoint: we don’t get much articles about human drivers crashing, because we’re so used to it. That doesn’t make it a good metric to consider their safety.

Edit: Having said that, this wasn’t even an article. Just an unsourced headline with a photo. One should strongly consider the possibility of a selection bias at work here.

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar
  • “AI means there will be fewer people required to do the same amount of work”
  • “this does not mean higher unemployment”

I think you left out a steep off reasoning there. At least, I don’t follow.

admin, (edited )
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

But the amount of workers will only stay the same if demand grows at the same rate as the production output.

admin, (edited )
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

Only in the last case there is a chance that the amount of jobs will remain the same, the other cases will lead to lost jobs.

admin,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

www.nvidia.com/Download/…/en-us/ here’s the release notes, it includes the list of supported products.

admin, (edited )
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

Because lawsuits are expensive, even when you’re not guilty.

I don’t think they’d be stupid enough to lie about hiring a voice actress for a voice model when they didn’t.

admin, (edited )
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

Wow, time goes that fast where you live? I’m posting this 15 minutes after you, so that’s like 2 weeks for you.

Got any stock tips?

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • JUstTest
  • kavyap
  • DreamBathrooms
  • cubers
  • osvaldo12
  • mdbf
  • magazineikmin
  • normalnudes
  • InstantRegret
  • rosin
  • Youngstown
  • slotface
  • khanakhh
  • ethstaker
  • Leos
  • ngwrru68w68
  • everett
  • cisconetworking
  • tacticalgear
  • anitta
  • thenastyranch
  • Durango
  • tester
  • GTA5RPClips
  • modclub
  • megavids
  • provamag3
  • lostlight
  • All magazines
    •