The intersection of "Luddite hooligan" and "stops to think about technological capabilities and future consequences before vandalizing stuff" is not large.
FaceDeer
joined 2 years ago
I think the thing he's likely complaining about is that Newsweek is implying that people complaining about Trump being old are being hypocrites rather than being consistent.
You're being weirdly pedantic. Biden is still just as old as he was, so he's still too old to run. If some other octogenarian stepped up and said he'd like to run I would say he's too old too.
Yet dropping out didn't make him a single day younger. He's still too old.
Makes it all the more amusing how OpenAI staff were fretting about how GPT-2 was "too dangerous to release" back in the day. Nowadays that class of LLM is a mere toy.
Shush, this is an opportunity for people to dump on Microsoft, if you take it from them they'll turn on you.
Though bear in mind that parameter count alone is not the only measure of a model's quality. There's been a lot of work done over the past year or two on getting better results from the same or smaller parameter counts, lots of discoveries have been made on how to train better and run inferencing better. The old ChatGPT3 from back at the dawn of all this was really big and was trained on a huge number of tokens but nowadays the small downloadable models fine-tuned by hobbyists would compete with it handily.
You can get decent results with much less these days, actually. I don't have personal experience (I do have a 24GB GPU) but the open source community has put a lot of work into getting models to run on lower-spec machines. Aim for smaller models (8B parameters is common) and low quantization (the values of the parameters get squished into smaller numbers of bits). It's slower and the results can be of noticeably lower quality but I've seen people talk about usable LLMs running CPU-only.
particularly for companies entrusted with vast amounts of sensitive personal information.
I nodded along to most of your comment but this cast a discordant and jarring tone over it. Why particularly those companies? The CrowdStrike failure didn't actually result in sensitive information being deleted or revealed, it just caused computers to shut down entirely. Throwing that in there as an area of particular concern seems clickbaity.
One of the background details I liked in Ghost in the Shell was how the high-end data analysts and programmers employed by the government did their work using cybernetic hands whose fingers could separate into dozens of smaller fingers to let them operate keyboards extremely quickly. They didn't use direct cybernetic links because that was a security vulnerability for their brains.
Different countries have a variety of very different approaches to appointing judges, and some of those methods are not nearly as easy to corrupt as the American system.
Americans are subject to a lot of cultural indoctrination about how their system is the "greatest democracy in the world," "leader of the free world," and other such platitudes. It's really not the case, though. America's system is one of the earliest that's still around, and unfortunately that means it's got a lot of problems that have been corrected in democracies that were founded later on but have remained embedded in America's.
Doesn't help that America has a somewhat problematic electorate as well.
Should they stop trying to do things as they approach an election?