I would also add: if you're paying, supporting their cause with your money.
Sometimes I would like to have magical make-my-project tool for my selfish reasons; sometimes I know it would be a bad choice to fall behind on what's to come. But I really, really don't want to support that future.
You're observing this "paradox", because what you call learning here is not learning in the ML sense; it's deriving better conclusions from more data. It's true for many ML methods, but it doesn't mean any actual learning happens.
There's another phenomenon. It's called pedantic denialism. Deriving conclusions from more data is the same thing as learning. You learned something from the new data hence the new conclusion. As long as that context window survives the LLM has learned.
How do you deal with a risk of LLM generating malicious code and then running it? I suspect it's a bit more difficult to set it up tailorer to your needs in a big corp.
it's a typo, but you've gotta admit Lorenzo il Magnifico on a 90s BBS dealing with political scandal in a steampunk Florence is a sick premise for a novel.
The reason they care whether your commercial software is licensed is that their business model is charging for software licenses for that software.
Once there were indications that people were very much interested in, and working on, running rips of commercial games on PS3 Linux, and/or leveraging OtherOS to jailbreak a stock PS3, it was basically game over for OtherOS/PS3 Linux, in spite of the fact that it had been advertised on the box (of the original "fat" PS3) as a feature of the system.
Piracy (in the running unlicensed commercial games/copyright infringement sense) had long been the killer app for jailbreaking, including mod chips (and other schemes for playing CD-R "backups") for the PS1 and PS2, as well as PSP jailbreaks and custom firmware; homebrew notwithstanding, the most popular use was playing commercial games without paying for them.
Sony also nerfed the original 5-console installation (aka "game sharing") for PSN games after players organized public game sharing web sites to split the cost of games 5 ways.
"No one could have predicted this!" as they (don't) say.
>Disney's position was nowhere near as unreasonable as everyone understands it to be.
>Now, the Disney lawyers also tried to argue that the Disney+ EULA would actually (at least plausibly) be relevant.
Well, you know, they also could have not done _that_. With it they deserve all the flak that they've got and more, simply because they resorted to a scummy tactic, whatever the reason.
You reminded me how infuriating it was not to be able to post comments on StackOverflow. Felt like getting those few upvotes required was taking forever, and all without ability to ask for clarification.
Goodness that is rough, then they instantly own your posts where blanking edits are vandalism (obviously great for the internet, albeit at potential occasional individual cost).
When I see an early realistic painting, I'm impressed by the skilled hand of the artist. When I see an impressionist one, I'm awed by their ability to go through the whole process and to know which strokes are the best ones to achieve such a result. When I see a modern oil painting, I marvel at that someone takes that medium and does such things with it, where maybe the ease of editing the digital content would make it so much more convenient.
Then when I see old paintings with very particular pigments, certain blues or reds for instance, I enjoy thinking about the whole chain of events that got them there; the need of creativity even in getting the colors you wanted.
We do love a pretty picture, but so do we love a display of skill and hard work.
Before GenAI this value was mostly self-evident, but by now it's becoming less and less so; and what's worse, it's rife with one thing we don't love for sure - which is lies.
I think it's "this is the way things are done in order to achieve X". Where people don't question neither whether this is the only way to achieve X, nor whether they do really care about X in the first place.
It seems common with regard to dependency injection frameworks. Do you need them for your code to be testable? No, even if it helps. Do you need them for your code to be modular? You don't, and do you really need modularity in your project? Reusability? Loose coupling?
Sometimes I would like to have magical make-my-project tool for my selfish reasons; sometimes I know it would be a bad choice to fall behind on what's to come. But I really, really don't want to support that future.
reply