theunknownmuncher

As far as I can tell, it is hype because it is the hot new toy that they can sell.

LLMs are great for tasks like handling natural language data or classifying and identifying semantic meaning of text, but they are NOT good at math, logic, or as a store of facts/information. I think that they do actually deserve a lot of hype for these specific use cases, because they really accomplish these extraordinarily better than previous/traditional approaches.

The big problem is that they are being used for things that they are not good at, like when people ask a chatbot questions they they expect a factual answer to. They are also surprisingly bad at summarizing text (in my opinion and also this has been shown by some studies) despite companies like Google and Microsoft using them for things like summarizing and present search results. I think these companies are ultimately shooting themselves in the foot when they use LLMs for things that LLMs aren't great for.

Think back to when blockchain was being shoved into everything possible, even places where blockchain makes no sense. And before blockchain, it was cloud

No, but they can easily generate text that is statistically likely to look like a source.

LLMs are a probabilistic model of language, not an information source.

They've got nothing on this guy!! They're literally grasping at straws

The mirror DOESN'T flip left and right. Imagine an x-axis as a horizontal line across the mirror, a y-axis as a vertical line up/down the mirror, and a z-axis as a line that comes straight out of/into the mirror.

The mirror is actually only flipping that z-axis that comes out of/into the mirror, by reflecting the light back

I was using the pinebook pro ARM laptop with manjaro linux as a semi-daily driver for a while. It is fine for simple tasks and web browsing, but you cannot expect the hardware to be quick or snappy. I had consistent issues with wifi, and eventually I got fed up with the weak performance and switched back to an x86-64 architecture laptop. In terms of software and support, besides the wifi issues, it was fine

Fair enough. Police will disclose and journalists will often report the number of weapons and ammo or any explosive devices found at the perpetrator's home, even if they were not brought to the scene or used in the crime. I think the ladder is a detail in the same vein because it is equipment that he had available to him.

I just don't understand why you're so fired up and bothering to argue about it then? Seems super trivial if you thought it neither adds nor takes away. Your only point in this argument is that the article could have left out some detail, for what, to be a little bit shorter??

I do get your overalll point, and if it was a random mass shooting, I'd agree that we don't need every little detail about the shooter's life story. There is some nuance to the fact that this was the attempted assassination of a former president, so it is going to be one of the biggest news stories in the US, and they're going to report all kinds of details about his life.

But the detail that he bought a ladder that morning is, in my opinion, relevant whether he ultimately brought it with him or not, and not a random detail. His activities leading up to the attempted assassination are relevant to understanding his thinking and mindset. It sheds light into how much prior planning or thought went into it.

Uhh, I am the user who said that... are you a bot that doesn't contextualize by username, perhaps? Probably just a simple mistake by a human.

It's a false equivalency: taking a shit is not equivalent to the shooter buying a ladder, and I don't think any reasonable person or journalist would count how many times he used the bathroom as part of his activities.

That's as much engagement of your semantic argument as you're going to get out of me.

All of his activities on that day are relevant to creating a complete picture of what occurred, and journalists choosing to withhold details and information is kind of a slippery slope?

EDIT, including this here so it is higher up in this argument thread:

Police will disclose and journalists will often report the number of weapons and ammo or any explosive devices found at the perpetrator’s home, even if they were not brought to the scene or used in the crime. I think the ladder is a detail in the same vein because it is equipment that he had available to him.

I was simply responding to the comment:

You have to trust someone with these communications, there is no free communication beyond face to face

the oh-so-clever smart alecks saying "whaddabout ISPs????" forgot about 2-way radio and meshnets

trust yourself by hosting a matrix server

FYI @[email protected] has provided a solution