Agreed, numpy really could/should be built in.
Agreed, numpy really could/should be built in.
Why would it be a bad sign that the language has built in tools for common things you need to do?
Clever, but might be too niche of a reference for people to understand.
Use the time honored technique of lying on the birthdate form.
Good question! The answer can be found by looking at how most of the commercial open source products are monetized. Software hosting and technical support are quite lucrative if the software is valuable.
But let’s look bigger than just software. How do content creators get paid? That’s far less tested. I expect crowdfunding to be the primary vehicle for that. It’s popular for indies, but the big boys haven’t caught up with the times yet.
Indeed! My personal political alignment does in fact incorporate much of communism.
I’m a digital communist, at any rate. If something can be copied for free, it darn well ought to be free. Anything else is artificial and enforced by threat of violence.
Men’s vision is movement based, just like T-rex.
Highly specific attack but certainly looks like it could be effective.
I see you just printed a bonchee.
Asking that question is the first step people need in order to finally come to that conclusion. We all just completed the process a loooooong time ago.
Sure, go for it. But good luck paying an army of copywriters to summarize every article you read.
That’s not what I’m implying. What I’m saying is that wasting time and effort on quality is pointless when the threshold for success is low.
For example, I could use aerospace quality parts (perfectly machined to micron-level tolerances) to build a toaster. However, while this would not increase the performance meaningfully, the cost would be orders of magnitude greater. Instead I can use shitty off-the-shelf parts because it doesn’t really make a difference.
Maybe in other words, engineering tolerances apply to LLMs too. They’re crude devices, but it’s totally fine if you have a crude problem.
From a certain point of view anyway…
You know how all the Jedi died? Well the good news is that Anakin survived.
One of my kids was interested and the other was completely horrified. They’re not doing a great job at targeting their audience.
It might be all I care about. Humans might always be better, but AI only has to be good enough at something to be valuable.
For example, summarizing an article might be incredibly low stakes (I’m feeling a bit curious today), or incredibly high stakes (I’m preparing a legal defense), depending on the context. An AI is sufficient for one use but not the other.
This seems to be millions of times more accurate, according to the article.
What I’m feeling is the opposite of what the studio execs want me to feel.
I thought it was fine. Just a departure from the established Dragon age formula.