Biggles @Biggles@social.cleverlibre.org

@darkuncle

Here's the thing: fair use has a set of real, specific, legal meanings, and in none of them is ingesting and indexing the *entire work* considered fair. We give leeway to human beings because we don't scale - but the LLM has no such hinderance. I have yet to hear a compelling legal argument why it might be fair, either - indeed, the opposite seems true. If you want to abolish copyright, that's a different discussion...

Work sometimes...

This is super dandy. https://gto76.github.io/python-cheatsheet/

@darkuncle

it's even more insidious than that - it's not that they believe their corpus is all true - it's that they don't have a concept of truth, or falsehood, or concepts in general. The idea that they can tell the truth is anthropomorphizing them - they generate symbols that match previous patterns, and it's us that ascribe meaning where it's not deserved - like seeing faces in clouds. So - no truth, no falsehood. What they are is correct or incorrect, or a mix of both, or "not even wrong" when they spew out nonsense.

With a book - we accurately attribute what is written to the author and not to a bundle of cardboard and paper, but the MML looks different - they are pretty damn effective in convincing people that they're something they aren't. I used to think of them as a parrot - but a parrot is unlikely to get someone killed, because you know it's a bird. I think of them now as a memetic virus - they mimic thought well enough to exploit weaknesses in human perception and cognition and get us to pay attention to them. They aren't evil, because there's no intent - they're just a disease we haven't developed any defenses against.

@darkuncle

Yeah, but (1) most people learn it fairly young, and (2) so far as I can tell, the LLMs in use today - all of them - still haven't learned it - and probably *can't*. They simply don't actually understand the semantic content of their corpus well enough to separate truth from falsehood. You might be able to work around that a bit by being *very* careful about what you feed them - the AWS docs one lies, but obviously so - but I don't think it's fixable with this type of technology.

@darkuncle

If I had an intern that would just make up shit when they didn't know the answer - I'd get a new intern. The ability to say "I don't know" is vital.

@darkuncle

Anyone who actually trusts the output of a LLM at this point hasn't been listening and deserves exactly what they get. Sorry. Tough Love.

@scalzi

How usable is it? The screen seems awfully small for an oldster like me. I keep hoping they'd do the same thing with a big (3" or more screen) - the ArduMAN!

@lauren

No lie, when I first saw a 2400 baud modem I had exactly the same thought. But then I was a teenager who used BBSs for messaging and had 90k floppy disks.

@nazokiyoubinbou @FuckElon @hkrn

It actually doesn't. I'm blocking you now.

@nazokiyoubinbou @FuckElon @hkrn

We'll have to agree to disagree, as all I got out of that paragraph was "I've never used Apple products and actively ignore history"

@FuckElon @nazokiyoubinbou @hkrn

To me, "ripped off" is a phone that only does security updates for two years, rather than the life of the phone. I used my 6s+ until it quite literally didn't have the cpu to keep up, with no battery replacements, easily 5 years. Relevant amusing graphic:

@nazokiyoubinbou @hkrn
This *is* Apple we're talking about. It's a luxury brand. I guarantee you they're on top of their suppliers like a ton of bricks. Will others do that? Only if they're stupid - it's trivial to sample and test phone batteries, even non-replaceable, to check compliance. In fact - the fact that you can get rip-off mislabeled junk batteries is a solid reason to prefer the one the manufacturer shipped with; you know who to blame if there's issues.

@dabu @jgg @hkrn

Bingo.

My understanding is this is happening anyway; getting wet is a common failure mode, and apparently consumer preference in Japan *insists* on waterproof - so a waterproof phone in general is desirable. I know personally I'd prefer waterproof to being able to change batteries easily.

Point being - don't expect easily replaceable batteries on iPhones, despite the news stories.

@compoundchem

I'm unconvinced about the utility of a scale that (apparently) is incapable of saying any substance whatsoever does *not* cause cancer.

Perhaps a "percentage of deaths over a set time period" - for some well-defined dosages - would be a better mechanism for evaluating risk of tested candidates? It always bugged me when they declare a substance cancer-causing, and "in lab mice, in dosages 10,000x higher than normal exposure" is left out. Is real guidance so much to ask?