61–70 of 268 posts
The models (AWD-LSTM and GPT-2) weren't good enough back then to usefully answer programming questions -- but it's super cool to see that vision realized with GPT-4 and other modern LLMs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are people who do not consider that "open". Who? Even Richard Stallman is okay with what they do: https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/selling-exceptions
Richard Stallman isn't necessarily the sole authority on such things. Consider creative common vs. AGPL. Is CockroachDB "open"? etc. In any case the software world has changed drastically since that article has been published.
Yikes. Reddit. Stack overflow. It's all going south. Maybe we won't even have to wait for LLMs to destroy the web we used to know.
Time to adopt Nostr as future-proof path.
This, along with recent Reddit goings-on has made me realize a major risk with the current structure of online communication. Take either Reddit or Stack Exchange as examples. They build a platform, and users contribute their time, thought, energy, and knowledge to build a community on that platform. Those companies can then gatekeep and restrict access to all that the community built, when all they did is provide th…
Seems to me SO built and delivered huge, huge amounts of value and it’s now all at risk because multibillion dollar companies are free riding.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Richard Stallman isn't necessarily the sole authority on such things. Consider creative common vs. AGPL. Is CockroachDB "open"? etc. In any case the software world has changed drastically since that article has been published.
Those all seem black and white. Creative Commons' NC and ND licenses are not open, but the rest are. The AGPL is open. CockroachDB is not.
"open" is not like 1+1=2. ultimately it is arbitrary. one definition of open is "to make available", by that definition all of them, including CockroachDB are "open".
open does not necessarily mean you can use it, just like how an open door does not necessarily mean you can enter the house.
in any case, we can agree to disagree.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of people were only willing to contribute to StackOverflow because of the CC licensing, trusting the knowledge wouldn't be locked up. As a business that depends on vast amounts of volunteer effort they need to balance providing a site where people are willing to contribute against making as much money as they can.
I wonder how many of those contributors, if re-consulted, would sign up to having their contributions used to train a for-profit LLM though? I certainly didn’t sweat it out helping people on SO to pay for Sam Altman’s fucking swimming pool.
Generative AI doesn't follow copyright or even explicit software licenses as we have seen in AI art with human signatures and Microsoft Copilot.
This, along with recent Reddit goings-on has made me realize a major risk with the current structure of online communication. Take either Reddit or Stack Exchange as examples. They build a platform, and users contribute their time, thought, energy, and knowledge to build a community on that platform. Those companies can then gatekeep and restrict access to all that the community built, when all they did is provide th…
A decentralized system will never work because 99% of users do not care at all; the centralized systems are easier to sign up for and use. It's been demonstrated over and over and over again. Even if the underlying tech is decentralized, the community will settle around one or a few big instances (for example, Gmail and GitHub) which often end up having significant control over the trajectory of the entire ecosystem.…
Email is a great example where most people wouldn't be interested in a version of email that only let's you email other @gmail.com users. Having a email address that can contact anyone, a phone number that can ring any other phone number etc instead of being locked into a single corporation network is a clear value add that people care about.
The main issue from my perspective is that we only have a select few large tech companies that operate as monopolies so are effectively able to block out new decentralized protocols from coming to be.
RCS messaging is a great example which I think most people would use over alternatives like WhatsApp and Imessage except that apple refusing to support it locks a huge fraction of the market out and stops widespread adoption being possible.
I don't think it's a question of preference, or people being uninterested. It's just a boring and repeated story of corporate monopolies intentionally reducing consumer choice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those all seem black and white. Creative Commons' NC and ND licenses are not open, but the rest are. The AGPL is open. CockroachDB is not.
you are not understanding. why is it not open? Who is the authority of "open". Why is CockroachDB not open? I can see their source on GitHub. "open" is not like 1+1=2. ultimately it is arbitrary. one definition of open is "to make available", by that definition all of them, including CockroachDB are "open". open does not necessarily mean you can use it, just like how an open door does not necessarily mean you can ent…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
you are not understanding. why is it not open? Who is the authority of "open". Why is CockroachDB not open? I can see their source on GitHub. "open" is not like 1+1=2. ultimately it is arbitrary. one definition of open is "to make available", by that definition all of them, including CockroachDB are "open". open does not necessarily mean you can use it, just like how an open door does not necessarily mean you can ent…
You're confusing "open" with "visible".
This, along with recent Reddit goings-on has made me realize a major risk with the current structure of online communication. Take either Reddit or Stack Exchange as examples. They build a platform, and users contribute their time, thought, energy, and knowledge to build a community on that platform. Those companies can then gatekeep and restrict access to all that the community built, when all they did is provide th…
Really? The takeaway isn’t rather that rent-seeking AI models need to figure out a way to reimburse companies and communities who’ve stored up all this capital? Seems to me SO built and delivered huge, huge amounts of value and it’s now all at risk because multibillion dollar companies are free riding.