https://i.imgur.com/SuPafFd.gif

and they’re using our retirement money to do it

i think they mean the ones in the middle

https://smartcdn.gprod.postmedia.digital/nexus/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/0703-dg-benches.jpeg

Glad to see everyone agrees this is

1. funny cos they’re crying over stealing what they stole

2. acknowledges this means the weights are actually open sourced (which is how it fuckin should be)

also discussion i’ve seen elsewhere:

3. when considering the energy footprint of chatgpt, also consider the energy footprint of running the internet for 30 years to accumulate all that data they stole. therefore the most ecological option is to extract the weights and then opensource it.

just want to add

4. if the accusations aren’t true (still a possibility), oai is probably deliberately buying time/stock recovery by keeping this discussion in the news rather than everyone discussing how much they suck

5. if large entities are going to capture and then open source each others proprietary weights, that may actually be one of the best outcomes for global humanity amidst this “AI” craze

wow the level of cope in this thread (thankfully not that many tho) arguing over stats - which are probably made up anyway.

some people can’t handle that most humans just wanna be friends regardless of gov politics bs

innovating or being less wasteful??

(·•᷄_•᷅ )

arguing to reduce the population so the privileged can have even more privilege?

( ˶ˆᗜˆ˵ )

gonna use this as an opportunity to launch my ted talk:

there’s no such thing as anything but “race mixing” since every single human on the planet is a mix of different ancient races anyway

(or to put another way, race is a bs term anyway since we’re all homosapiens)

Yeah I don’t know. Just see how the modern world is shaping society to the negative I just don’t see where we are close to utopia But right now we are on a different path

That was essentially a big part of my point. We could be close to a utopia by now (from the perspective of technological possibilities).

Instead, as I said

for some suspicious reason we took a very different road, and here we are

That said I don’t currently believe technology itself is inherently bad.

Like all tools, it depends what you do with it.

Is a general purpose tool like hammer good or bad? It has the capacity for both. And therefore it’s up to the user which is which.

And that’s the issue really, what are we doing with our wonderous technology?

This might be a bit of a radical take. But in that ~125 year window i was refering to, alot of machines we’ve invented are actually weapons.

Weapons to destroy eachother physically (conflict/threats of violence etc).

Weapons to destroy nature (deforestation and probably most mining).

Weapons to destroy the mind (social media etc, actually most media now).

What if we’d had 1+¼ century of building a collective utopia instead of all these weapons?

afaict from the technical perspective it’s not really unfeasible, its the non-technical problem: the user and what they use the tools for.

Another clue for us is probably the term appropriate technology, which is a vibe i think eg. solar punk is helping to cultivate.

Anyway we’ve done ALOT of misuse. That’s why i don’t blame technology itself.

I still think it’s more about what we’ve done with it.

necessary decline in our quality of life

i’m not refuting your core premise.

but on the note of this issue, not sure i can agree.

have a look at this public infrastructure technology from 122 years ago:

Youtube/Invidious

imagine if we’d spent the last 1+¼ century collectively working towards the utopia this kind of project hinted at - instead of developing new machines to destroy?

typically they say utopian dreams scatter in the face of increased technological awareness. have to say my experience has been the opposite.

the more i learn about technology, the more i realise we could probably be very close to a near-utopia by now. for some suspicious reason we took a very different road, and here we are.

i reckon there’s a good chance she was trolling. and if so, fuckin well played.

if you wanna continue to embarrass yourself go ahead. i won’t be entertaining this sad display any longer.

anyone is free to search the thread and read what i wrote in the full context it was stated.

and to see your blatant dishonesty.

good luck mate, i hope you find some kind of peace to whatever is keeping you so fixated about windows users that you need to fabricate an enemy in me over that aspect, despite me clearly and repeatedly denouncing it from day 1 of this discussion. all the best.

and for the record i don’t think its about ‘inadequacies’. its not a magic skill or secret knowledge. its just about investing the time to learn. put the time in and it will come, as you’ve already seen with your server.

nowhere in this entire essay, nor in any of your other comments for that matter, do you even address my point that lumping in Windows users with the immoral actions of a company results in a harmful dissonance

anyone can see the scrollback for themselves, it’s plainly visible i denounced it multiple times. the evidence is right here for anyone to see:

But then you learn they got rich by cutting corners and screwing over your friends. And are actively investing in making the public pool shit so they can grandstand their pool. Noone is blaming you for going up to the rich guys pool to have a nice easy time. Or at least, I’m not defending the kind of linux zealots who might blame you for choosing that

Source

As I mentioned, I’m not here to criticise you for making the choice you have, or defend those who do criticise you for it.

Source

As stated we are not listing reasons for condemning you for your choice

Source

As stated many times, you are welcome to your choice, and your choice is understandable.

Source

dude its just sad at this point. why are you bothering to pretend its not addressed when its addressed repeatedly and was even requoted like 2 posts before you made your ridiculous, verifiably false statement.

what is the purpose of this game? who do you think you’re kidding? anyone can see you’re being dishonest. and don’t even have the grace to admit it, you’re wrong. completely wasting an opportunity for us both to learn and for us to be friends even.

whats even stranger is the original discussion was about linux community shitting on windows NOT windows users:

The Linux community shitting on Windows is worse

Source

you’ve fixated on this windows user issue when, as quoted, it was never even about that, was already denounced by me immediately as quoted & sourced repeatedly above.

i can see why you think linux users are smug arseholes, you pull this shit and cry when you don’t get away with it. its just sad dude. noone at microsoft is paying for your time to get invested like this. you think you give a fuck about you???

but you know who might actually give a fuck about you? us, here, in this community. but you need to start by being honest with yourself about this, otherwise you are the one making it a waste of time.

the discussion was actually about it being “more annoying”. (for which we’re still yet to have an answer to btw)

unable to defend that, next it was about it being “just tiresome” (not “more annoying”).

now its “the framing of it being about a power differential to be irrelevant” (not “just tiresome”, or “more annoying” either?).

so the complaint changes, but the one constant is that you just happen to still be right each time (yet can’t provide a consistent reason why).

in other words, as stated from the outset, no coherent or consistent arguments. just mindless downvoting.

honestly, it’s disappointing.

just venting. lol

the problem is, that it keeps getting worse and more (in/per)vasive. when new items are added to the list, do you really expect its unreasonable that people are going to discuss the new & continued revelations?

all linux users are smug arseholes because once upon a time some of them hurt my feelings. and even though another linux user repeatedly denounced that and said its unfortunate, i pretended they didn’t because they wouldn’t endlessly cry with me about my hurt feelings and instead talked about actual real world facts, what a horrible group of people

i said i don’t defend it in the very first message i said to you. why isn’t that enough?

you claim i won’t address it when i denounced it in the very first reply i sent to you?!? when i already denounced it, what is there left to say?

Thanks for wasting my time. It seems you have no interest in the facts or learning anything new. You just want to be right, even when discussing a topic you openly admit you know little to nothing about. You freely admit you can’t get linux to work properly, yet suppose to lecture everyone what they are and are not free to discuss about this very same topic you admit you can’t get a handle on. All because your ego got a little bruised

enjoy.

Either we are failing to communicate (because i too have a strong sense you just “want to be right” regardless of the facts), or you’re actually engaging in bad faith discussion.

Since you mentioned you have the same feeling I’ll try to lay it out a bit more.

Its unfortunate you’ve had people ego flex on you over supposed morality. But that doesn’t mean everyone who mentions linux is like that.

Example, I’ve seen people who go up to smokers and evangalise about how smoking is “bad”, and how they’re “hurting society BY hurting themselves with smoking”. Well arguments about second hand smoke aside, I don’t really think that approach is especially helpful. It’s a moral position based on this abstract idea - even if statistically smokers increase our insurance or some shit like that, i doubt many people have the personal experience to say it actually effects them, so it defs comes off as a supposed moral high ground thing, right?

Because some people are going around making that kind of fuss, does mean that EVERYONE who chooses not to smoke is acting out some moral high ground fantasy? Are ALL those who quit smoking “for their health” just morality faking fuckwits? Or are some of them legit worried about their lung health?

For another example, your claim of conflation very much appears to be centred around your misunderstanding of the facts: You’ve had some people flex on your ego, and thats unfortunate. But I don’t think its useful to allow that experience to taint everything else you hear on the topic, and therefore presume you know what someone is saying just because someone else took the same side on the same topic.

The entire premise of traditional digital computing is centred on some key concepts, one of which is defined behaviour. Very clear and strict logical boundaries need to be established for what is defined behaviour. In simple, an operation (eg. adding two numbers), must be deterministic, that is the same two numbers when added must always produce the same resulting number.

Central to another aspect of this is trust. If you cannot trust the outcome of defined behaviour, then the precepts of computing fall apart for a variety of important applications, the behaviour is no longer strictly defined.

I’d hard to overstate how important this is, how much it empowers you as a member of the public, who do not have the resources to hire a team of number crunchers (as companies used to have to do in the old days).

Microsoft have repeatedly shown, they cannot be trusted. They will manipulate and deceive, by design in your computer, with actual code they insert into windows and then knowingly ship.

For these people, this problem matters ALOT, and this isn’t some abstract thing, its not some idealist philosophy to smugly throw around at parties, its a cold electronic fact - something they have to deal with, overcome, often at their own expense. The problem being, that when they ask their computer to perform an operation, their computer might intentionally lie to them about the operation itself, the outcome of the operation, or the integrity of the information going in or out of that operation.

The trust problem between microsoft and the code they insert into windows (running at the highest privilege level on YOUR computer hardware), is absolutely intertwined in the real world, in practice, in a variety of ways. Yes, all threat models involving linux deal with trust problems as well. But when you have a known compromised product from a known bad actor it is simply incorrect to suggest the product and the creator can only be considered in isolation from eachother.

And as you can appreciate you don’t even need to do anything wrong, for these kind of user-hostile features to be used against you, even in ways not intended by those who put them there - which is a whole other issue.

I could go on & on as this is really just touching the surface, but I hope you can begin to appreciate it’s not even remotely close to a conflation, this is not some guilt by association abstract nonsense, this is deeply and painfully practical. i really hope you can at least get a glimpse of it for yourself now.