![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://fry.gs/pictrs/image/c6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
I’m curious what query you used.
I’m curious what query you used.
It’s people having their battery die while they wait for an open charger.
Thank you. This made no sense to me at first.
This is a good tool for visualizing your raid needs from your capacity and total number of drives.
https://www.seagate.com/products/nas-drives/raid-calculator/
I’ll preface that I’m no raid expert, just a nerd that uses it occasionally.
The main benefit of most raid configurations is the redundancy they provide. If you lose one drive, you do not lose any data. It’s kinda obvious how you can have 1:1 redundancy, you just have an exact copy of the drive. But there are ways to split data into three chunks so that you can rebuild the data from any two chunks, and 5 chunks so that you can loose and two chunks. Truly understand how raid does this could easily be an entire college course.
Raid 0 is the exception. All it does is “join together” a bunch of drives into one disk. And if you lose an individual disk you likely will lose most of your data.
Another big difference is read/write speed. From my understanding, every raid configuration is slower to read and write than if you were using a single drive. Each raid configuration is varying levels of slower than the “base speed”
I typically use raid 5 or 6, since that gives some redundancy, but I can keep most of my total storage space.
The main thing in all of this is to keep an eye on drive health. If you lose more drives than your array can handle, all of your data is gone. From my understanding, there is no easy way to get the data off a broken raid array.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I was being unclear about my opinion on the timing. I meant to say take the timing out of the equation all together.
But yes, as a relative of someone who has been assaulted and sexually assaulted, my opinion is speak out loudly and immediately when faced with this kind of stuff. Every minute you waste speaking out is another minute the assaulter roams free. I get that some may be uncomfortable with that, and they should speak out as soon as they are emotionally able to.
Not to play semantics like the insanely bad take from Linus, but this isn’t just a conversation, her accusations are serious.
I was clearly being unclear, the timing isn’t important here. The me too movement showed that a lot of people who faced some of the same things she did stayed quiet for years.
I do think a healthy amount of scepticism is healthy here. Her accusations are worded very carefully to not directly target anyone in particular and there is no proof of her accusations nor any way for LMG to dispute her claims because of how they are worded. Regardless of the timing. It’s all a little too convenient.
That said, scepticism doesn’t mean blind faith in LMG, and it doesn’t mean tearing down the accuser. The new CEO getting an independent investigation is the best thing possible and we should hold our judgement until the result of that investigation.
Edit: made my point regarding the timing more clear.
I’m glad to see lemmy so active, even if it is negatively against my comment
I feel like you’re undereducated on how and when AI models are trained. Especially for the gpt model, it’s not “constantly learning” like other models. It’s being tweaked in discreet increments by developers trying to cover their ass, and get it to less frequently say things they can be sued for.
Also, AI are already training other AI, that’s kinda how AI are made… There’s an AI that detects how well a given phrase follows another phrase, and that’s used to train the part of the AI you interact with. (arguably they are part of the same whole, depending on how you view the architecture)
CGP gray has a good into video on how bots learn, it’s pretty outdated and not really applicable to how LLMs learn, but the general idea is still there.
It’s definitely gone down hill recently, but at the launch of gpt4 it was pretty incredible. It would make several logical jumps that a lot of actual people probably wouldn’t make. I remember my “wow moment” was asking how many M&M’s would fit in a typical glass milk jug, and then I measured it myself (by weight) and got an answer about 8% off. It gave measurements and cited actual equations. I couldn’t find anything through Google that solved the same problem or had the same answer that it could have just copied. It was supposed to be bad at math, but gpt4 got those types of problems pretty much spot on for me.
I think that most people who have tried the latest AI models have had a bad experience because its power is distributed over more users.
No, I think they’re being literal. There is value that they want in your privacy.