this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
836 points (99.1% liked)

Technology

66353 readers
4315 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 15 points 54 minutes ago

I am good with that.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 33 minutes ago

Oops, oh well. I very much hope it's over, asshole.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 16 minutes ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 minutes ago

Apparantly their trying to get Deepseek banned again, really doesn't like competition this guy.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

The only way this would be ok is if openai was actually open. make the entire damn thing free and open source, and most of the complaints will go away.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Truly open is the only way LLMs make sense.

They're using us and our content openly. The relationship should be reciprocal. Now, they need to somehow keep the servers running.

Perhaps a SETI like model?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 40 minutes ago

I mean, make em non profit (or not for profit) and perfecly good with that. Also open source the model so I can run it on my own hardware if I want to.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 3 hours ago

over it is then. Buh bye!

[–] [email protected] 30 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

Why does Sam have such a punchable face?

[–] [email protected] 24 points 3 hours ago (3 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

let's have a tier list of billionaires by face punchability.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

my top 3:

#1 Elon Musk

#2 Mark Zuckerberg

#3 Jeff Bezos

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

I hate zuckerburg as much as anyone, but I find his face surprisingly low on the punchability index. Musk and Bezos at 1 and 2 for me.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Zuck is, however, at the top of the list for lizard person index.

Bezos has such a shit-eating grin. Really makes him infinitely more punchable

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago

oh zuck is such a lizard-person.

Bezos' entire personality gets me fuming; I would want to punch him even if he weren't a billionaire. (Remember that time he talked over William Shatner touchdown?)

Musk honestly looks ok to me personally, I guess the gender-affirming surgeries went well. But the thought of what's going on behind his eyes makes me want to punch him in the face real bad.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 hours ago

Yeah but his especially, it's so squishy.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago

Cosmic justice?

[–] [email protected] 27 points 3 hours ago

Business that stole everyone's information to train a model complains that businesses can steal information to train models.

Yeah I'll pour one out for folks who promised to open-source their model and then backed out the moment the money appeared... Wankers.

[–] [email protected] 120 points 6 hours ago (19 children)

But I can't pirate copyrighted materials to "train" my own real intelligence.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 49 minutes ago

That's because the elites don't want you to think for yourself, and instead are designing tools that will tell you what to think.

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Perhaps this is just a problem with the way the model works. Always requiring new data and unable to use current data, to ponder and expand upon while making new connections about ideas that influenced the author… LLM’s are a smoke and mirrors show, not a real intelligence.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 37 minutes ago* (last edited 37 minutes ago) (1 children)

They do seem fundamentally limited somehow. With all the bazillion watts they are cheap imitation at best compared to mere 20 Watts of human brain

[–] [email protected] 1 points 15 minutes ago

or it might be playing dumb...

[–] [email protected] 96 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

"We can't succeed without breaking the law. We can't succeed without operating unethically."

I'm so sick of this bullshit. They pretend to love a free market until it's not in their favor and then they ask us to bend over backwards for them.

Too many people think they're superior. Which is ironic, because they're also the ones asking for handouts and rule bending. If you were superior, you wouldn't need all the unethical things that you're asking for.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 39 points 6 hours ago (10 children)

Copyrights should have never been extended longer than 5 years in the first place, either remove draconian copyright laws or outlaw LLM style models using copyrighted material, corpos can't have both.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

I think copyright lasting 20 years or so is not unreasonable in our current society. I'd obviously love to live in a society where we could get away with lower. As a compromise, I'd like to see compulsory licensing applied to all written work. (E.g., after n years, anyone can use it if they pay royalties and you can't stop them; the amount of royalties gradually decreases until it's in the public domain.)

[–] [email protected] 27 points 5 hours ago (12 children)

Bro, what? Some books take more than 5 years to write and you want their authors to only have authorship of it for 5 years? Wtf. I have published books that are a dozen years old and I'm in my mid-30s. This is an insane take.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

The one I thought was a good compromise was 14 years, with the option to file again for a single renewal for a second 14 years. That was the basic system in the US for quite a while, and it has the benefit of being a good fit for the human life span--it means that the stuff that was popular with our parents when we were kids, i.e. the cultural milieu in which we were raised, would be public domain by the time we were adults, and we'd be free to remix it and revisit it. It also covers the vast majority of the sales lifetime of a work, and makes preservation and archiving more generally feasible.

5 years may be an overcorrection, but I think very limited terms like that are closer to the right solution than our current system is.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›