We use the Azure models and there isn't an issue with safety filters as such for enterprise customers. The one time we had an issue microsoft changed the safety measures. Of course the safety measures we might meet are the sort of engineering which could be interpreted as weapons manufacturing, and not "political" as such. Basically the safety guard rails seem to be added on top of all these models, which means they can also be removed without impacting the model. I could be wrong on that, but it seems that way.
Berlusconi is the architect of the modern oligarchy. Control the media, control the public opinion and narrative. I think that what is happening in America is something new though. The dismantling of the US government is weird on it's own, but the step down from US soft power is what really makes no sense. The previous 80ish years of US world dominance was build on a combination of military might and soft power. Europe was rather ruined after WW2, the reason it's as advanced as it is today, and the reason we are/were such close allies with the USA is because of programs like the Marshall plan. Which was essentially the USA giving Europeans the money to buy American products. Stuff like access to US produced tractors revolutionised European farming as an example. On the US side this meant that the USA investment into Europe made it possible for the American wartime industry to restructure itself. So that instead of producing tanks, factories could produce farm equipment and so on. Total win-win.
Military power is necessary, but political influence is bought with soft power and diplomacy. The reason USA has military bases over most of the world. Places which allows America to have places to "store" all that military might outside the USA is because it has allies. The Russian loss of their Syrian bases is a good example or what happens when you lose that soft power. That same soft power is also the reason American brands can sell their stuff globally. Basically the entire American entertainment industry and all the foreign aid programs are giant advertising ventures, selling the American lifestyle. When that soft power is gone, America will still be capable of getting it's way in many cases through threats. People don't respond well to that though. With USA rivals more than happy to step in, you shouldn't be surprised to see Coca Cola replaced by some Chinese cola brand sometime down the road. This is obviously a semi ridiculous example, but I think it's a good illustration if what could happen. That same thing will affect US tech dominance as well. Here in Denmark companies are now actively looking for exit strategies from the American cloud because of the increased risk. I don't think anyone seriously expects something to happen, but at the same time, there is nothing companies hate more than risk. The reason Google Cloud never made it in Europe is because it has more risk than Azure and AWS, and with European alternatives having caught up... Well...
What is perhaps even worse is that the only reason the USA can function with its current deficit is because of the Dollar. If BRICS succeeds in moving half of the worlds population away from the Dollar, the American "empire" will fall considering it's the only "empire" in the history of mankind which has been capable of maintaining it's world dominance while also increasing its deficit.
Hitler and Nazi Germany might be the example everyone knows, and Musk performing his "gesture" doesn't exactly help matters. There doesn't seem to be a real long term plan behind what the aristocracy in the US is doing right now though. At least not one which will keep them safe from each ohter or society as a whole. Berlusconi and his buddies never went to prison after all, no one fell out of a window and so on.
Having used both exclusively for warhammer and blood bowl content the instagram algorithm has been horrible in my very anecdotal experience. It keeps pushing content I have absolutly no interest in, where as TikTok only pushes warhammer and blood bowl content + adds.
While I agree with both you and the article I also think it'll depend on more than just the volume of your data. We have quite a lot of documents that we classify. It's around 10-100k a month, some rather large others simple invoices. We used to have a couple of AI specialists who handled the classification with local NLP models, but when they left we had to find alternatives. For us this was the AI services in the cloud we use and the result has been a document warehouse which is both easier for the business to manage and a "pipeline" which is much cheaper than having those AI specialists on the payroll.
I imagine this wouldn't be the case if we were to do more classification projects, but we aren't. We did try to find replacements first, but it was impossible for us to attract any talent, which isn't too much of a surprise considering it's mainly maintenance. Using external consultants for that maintenance proved to be almost more expensive than having two full time employees.
It's not just NPM, it's the trust in third party libraries in general. Even though it's much rarer, you'll see exploits on platforms like Nuget. You're also going to see them on JSR. You have more security because they are immutable, but you're not protected from downloading a malicious pacakge before it's outed.
I think what we're more likely to see is that leglislation like DORA and NSIS increasinly require that you audit third party packages. This enforcing a different way of doing development in critical industries. I also think you're going to see a lot less usage of external packages in the age of LLM's. Because why would you pull an external package to generate something like your OpenAPI specification when any LLM can write a cli script that does it for you in an hour or two of configuring it to your needs? Similarily, you don't need to use LLM's directly to auto-generate "boring" parts of your code, you can have them build cli tools which does it. That way you're not relying on outside factors, and while I can almost guarantee that these cli tools will be horrible cowboy code, their output will be what you refine the tools to make.
With languages like Go pushing everything you need in their standard packages, you're looking at a world where you can do a lot of things with nothing but the standard library very easily.
I'm not the person you asked but I chose Emacs over VSC because it's just a better fit for a lot of things for me. I do think the telemetry Microsoft harvests through VSC is an issue to consider. While it is "just" metadata and no file content, they're getting your entire project structure down to file extensions. I don't see why I would want Microsoft to know what I'm working on. Anyway, the key point for me was ORG mode and that plugins for Go and C++ suck(ed?) in VSC. There are other things, the intellisense is slow, the vim plugin is terrible, the constant Microsoft product pushes are annoying, there is no Magit and so on.
I think it's important to say that I don't dislike VSC as such at this point. Because I probably made it sound like I think it's terrible. I don't I think it's ok. I didn't mind using it for Typescript as an example. Over all I think it's average at best. I get why people use it, it's easy to setup. It's easy to share configurations and so on. I probably would have gone from vim to neovim if it wasn't for doom emacs though.
I think the major advantage both emacs and vim have though is that they're always good. A lot of VSC users are now switching to Zed and that hamsterwheel will go on and on. With vim or emacs you'll never really have to change anything.
I’ve gone from vim to vsc, and now to sublime. Sublime has a nice plugin ecosystem and is in python as well, and most importantly has LSP support written by the authors. It also is wayyyyy faster than VSC now; basically as fast as VIM, but has a better UI and I have vim keyboard integration.
Pretty much the reasons I don't care about VSC. Sensible telemetry is not an issue for me, but pushing electron while there are much more performant solutions is one. I'm much more amenable to the Emacs and Vim's plugin/package solutions than VSC. And they're extraordinary stable.
I’m also unease about the open-source-but-not-really VSCode situation. I don’t know how useful an editor you can build from the available source, which is enough for me to not consider it seriously. I’ve been bitten before.
> Even though we do not pass the telemetry build flags (and go out of our way to cripple the baked-in telemetry), Microsoft will still track usage by default.
I'm genuinely curious but what did you use StackOverflow for before? With a couple of decades in the industry I can't remember when the last time I "Google programmed" anything was. I always go directly to the documentation for whatever it is I'm working for, because where else would I find out how it actually works? It's not like I haven't "Google programmed" when I was younger, but it's just such a slow process based on trusting strangers on the internet that it never really made much sense once I started knowing what I was doing. I sort of view LLM's in a similar manner. Why would you go to them rather than the actual documentation? I realize this might sound arrogant or rude, and I really hope you believe me when I say that I don't mean it like this. The reason I'm curious is because we're really struggling getting junior developers to not look, everywhere, but the documentation first. Which means they often actually don't know how what they build works. Which can be an issue when they load every object of a list into memory isntead of using a generator...
As far as using LLMs in anger I would really advice anyone to use them. GitHub copilot hasn't been very useful for me personally, but I get a lot of value out of running my thought process by a LLM. I think better when I "think out loud" and that is obviously challenging when everyone is busy. Running my ideas by an LLM helps me process them in a similar (if not better) fashion, often it won't even really matter what the LLM conjures up because simply describing what I want to do often gives me new ideas, like "thinking out loud".
As far as coding goes. I find it extremely useful to have LLMs write cli scripts to auto-generate code. The code the LLM will produce is going to be absolute shite, but that doesn't matter if the output is perfectly fine. It's reduced my personal reliance on third party tools by quite a lot. Because why would I need a code generator for something (and in that process trust a bunch of 3rd party libraries) when I can have a LLM write a similar tool in half an hour?
I believe you don't mean to be rude, but you just sound completely naive to me.
To think that documentation includes everything is just, like, have you actually been coding anything at all that goes just slightly off the happy path?
Example from yesterday: I have a modular JavaFX application (i.e. it uses Java JMS modules, not just Maven/Gradle modules). I introduced a call to `url()` in JavaFX CSS. That works when running using the classpath, but not when using the module path. I spent half an hour reading docs to see what they say about modular applications. They didn't mention anything at all. Specially because in my case, I was not just doing `getClass().getResource`... I was using the CSS directive to load a resource from the jar. This is exactly when I would likely go on SO and ask if anyone had seen this before. It used to be highly likely someone who's an expert on JavaFX would see and answer my question, sometimes even people who directly worked on JavaFX!
StackOverflow was not really meant for juniors, as juniors usually can indeed find answers on documentation, normally. It was, like ExpertsExchange before it, a place for veterans to exchange tribal knowledge like this. If you think only juniors use SO, you seem to have arrived at the scene just yesterday and just don't know what you're talking about.
> Why would you go to them rather than the actual documentation?
Not every documentation is made equal. For example: Android docs are royal shit. They cover some basic things, e.g. show a button, but good look finding esoteric Bluetooth information or package management, etc. Most of it is a mix of experimentation and historical knowledge (baggage).
They are wildly different. I'm not sure the Android API reference is that bad, but that is mainly because I've spent a good amount years with the various .Net API references and the Android one is a much more shiny turd than those. I haven't had issues with Bluetooth myself, the Bluetooth SIG has some nice specification PDF's but I assume you're talking about the ones which couldn't be found? I mean this in a "they don't seem to exist" kind of way and not that, you specifically, couldn't find them.
I agree though. It's just that I've never really found internet answers to be very useful. I did actually search for information a few years back when I had to work with a solar inverter datalogger, but it turned out that having the ridicilously long German engineering manual scanned, OCR processed and translated was faster. Anyway, we all have our great white whales. I'm virtually incapable of understanding the SQLAlchemy documentation as an example, luckily I'll probably never have to use it again.
I think parts of our industry has gotten worse, but I also think there are a lot of opportunities to do some really great (and fun) work. I work in the green energy industry and I like working with software for solar plant equipment. I hope I can eventually pick up a little more on the electrical engineering side of things and get into farming robots.
Don't get me wrong, I also do work in the financial aspects of it and that'... Well, useless is too strong a word, but in the grand scheme of things it's frankly useless. There is so much ridiculous leglislation that can be digitized, some of it is stupid. Like how you can get various tax benefits if you split what you and I think of as a single solar farm into 100 smaller companies. How to game the various financial tariffs, how to figure out the optimal direction for solar cells based on market data. That sort of stuff. Then there is the reasonable parts, like how Italy has an agency which requires all money transactions to go through them as an anti-mafia thing (sorry I can't be more clear on that part I didn't make it). Over all though, it's fun to work with stuff that has a real world use.
In Denmark the electricity price is calculated per hour for consumers, allowing us to move tumble drying, dishwashing and laundry to times, when it's cheaper to use power (= more renewable energy in the grid). This obviously requires some digital solutions to work and I think it's a great example where digitalization drives value in other sectors (in this case the power sector).
I actually don't know too much about what power traders do in the various EU nations. The majority of our plants tend to shut down production once the grid is too full since that is what many countries require. Hopefully we'll see storage get to a point where we can keep the power for later, but that's not where we're at right now. A solar panel and it's inverter and datalogger don't work without software though, and it can be quite fun to work with that tech. At least in my opinion.
> Not having metrics means it all depends on the gut feeling of executives.
Having spent a couple of decades in enterprise I can say that in my anecdotal experience it does so anyway. I've rarely seen any form of metrics put to good long term use. That's not to say that it doesn't happen, but benefit relaization seems to be something very few managers and teams actually work with beyond hitting some metric. It's usually the most obvious with changes in management. I've seen hordes of measurements thrown in the bin when a new manager took over a team and had different goals and values. On the flip side there are a lot of negative side effects of metrics over time. If you measure employees by the hour you create a culture of people who won't help each-other because how do they registrer that?
I mainly view productivity measurements as a HR tool for managers who don't actually know what their team members are doing. Which can happen for a lot of reasons, sometimes it can be because the manager is simply bad at people management, often it's because they are too busy. What is especially bad about them, however, is that people aren't consistently productive and what you really want to work with is how to keep them motivated. A motivated great employee can be unproductive in a period where they have small children, a loved one is sick and so on and an unmotivated employee can be very productive while simentaniously looking to leave your comapny.
I get why these tools exist though. Most managers are weak decision makers and HR supply them with tools that help them over come this.
I'm Scandinavian and not invested in the American culture wars and I still got a good chuckle out of how bad an idea this was. Who on earth could've thought it was a good idea to get an AI to pretend to be a black queer mother of two? I'm sure it'll piss off a lot of anti-woke people, but really, how on earth did the issues with this not become obvious for the team? I'm not sure if the AI knows who trained it (and I wonder how they did it) but the team can't have included a lot of common sense or real world experience for them to do something so fundementally stupid.
I'm baffled that they didn't even try to hide the fact these profiles are artificial but outright add that bleak gray text saying "AI managed by Meta". I mean, did we reach some checkpoint here where reality is blurred with fiction? Do we now treat these generated personas on par with real humans?
Honestly, I don't think meta can go any lower from this point in order to get the user engagement with their silly plaything that facebook has become.
> I mean, did we reach some checkpoint here where reality is blurred with fiction?
Yes, the first interactive synthetic pop culture icon is probably the Vocaloid Hakune Mitsu, circa 2007, and she has lots of fans who know exactly who and what she is. I am not surprised Meta wants in on the "influencer" action with synthetic personas: no commissions to be paid, they can create a persona for every possible niche for a marginal cost.
The technology is not there yet, we've barely progressed from Tay in terms of corporates' ability to prevent their AIs from saying things that cause bad PR. AI is definitely coming for influencers, the economics are just too good
> Who on earth could've thought it was a good idea to get an AI to pretend to be a black queer mother of two?
I would think that the obvious use of AI Facebook profiles would be to train them on someone who actually existed in the real world. Take someone like Jimmy Carter, train an LLM on everything he's ever said, and then let people interact with that.
But I imagine there are legal reasons they can't do this?
The article indicates that it was one of 28 personas created by meta. However, the reporters in between the story and you, thought that one would be interesting to you and so promoted it's relevance. In actuality, if you rolled a dice of potential human traits 28 times, this could be a statistically normal combination
Can you explain why it is you think that makes it any better? I can think of no argument that would make this particular persona anything but a tremendously stupid idea. Even if it was one in a thousand personas it would almost certainly be found and singled out by articles like this one.
> how on earth did the issues with this not become obvious for the team?
I haven't reviewed the context of all 28. But if "the team" were trying to do this rationally: perhaps they'd use census data to weight human characteristics and roll 28 dice. We might not expect more than one of 28 to end up as "queer black mom" but it's not necessarily "woke bait" or "rage bait" for one of 28 to land on those squares. Perhaps it was a logical way of assigning traits?
I don't think it's woke or rage bait. As I said I think it's no real world experience and no common sense and I'm frankly amazed that nobody in a SoMe/advertisement organisation didn't consider how the world would react.
I'm not sure if you're joking but your comment expresses it backwards - according to the op article, meta made 28 such bots. One of those bots had the insta profile tagline "queer black mom". In between meta's creation of the 28 and the story arriving on your dinner plate, someone decided to focus the coverage on that one of 28. They thought it would be interesting to people and clearly were right
I'm not OP and I have no idea what the actual odds are. But, well, only 15% of Americans are black to start with, and obviously only half of those are women - and at that point we're already down to 1 in 14. So, unless every other black woman is a queer mom, there's no way it's 1 in 28.
If you were trying to mimic a distribution of Instagram users, and you rolled the dice 28 times, it's not unreasonable that this combination of traits could be expected one twenty eighth of the time.
Maybe everyone of the 28 AI "people" represents one of the team members, but that doesn't make it any less of a bad idea in my eyes. As a father of girls I've seen full well how representation matters in media, but I suspect that AI "people" is the one area where people will want as little representation as possible.
reply