[–] 0 points 2 years ago

It would be luck based for pure LLMs, but now I wonder if the models that can use Python notebooks might be able to code a script to count it. Like its actually possible for an AI to get this answer consistently correct these days.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    I was sceptical at first too, but the way they're not just adding another chatbot, that it is basically a LLM request composing tool is really interesting. Its not trying to hide what an LLM is behind some obscure personality interface, its a text processing tool foremost. I like it!

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    Personally, if I can't go from human readable data to a complete model then I don't consider it open source. I understand these companies want to keep the magic sauce thats printing them money but all the open source marketing is inherently dishonest. They should be clear that the architecture and the product they are selling is separate, much like proprietary software just has all the open source software they used as a footnote in their about screens.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The way I understand the users didn't necessarily realize McAfee is responsible, just that a bunch of sqlite files appeared in temp so they might not connect the dots here anyway. Or even know McAfee is installed considering their shady practices.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    I do think we're machines, I said so previously, I don't think there is much more to it than physical attributes, but those attributes let us have this discussion. Remarkable in its own right, I don't see why it needs to be more, but again, all personal opinion.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • view more: next ›