

Being subject to social pressure doesn’t make you weak or less than. It is a normal part of being a social animal.


Being subject to social pressure doesn’t make you weak or less than. It is a normal part of being a social animal.


Why? I consistently see these anti AI purity tests come up.
We need people who are skeptical to engage on AI.
People hate technology and change. Before AI it was smartphones. Before smartphones it was photoshop/digital art and CGI. Before CGI it was the Internet. Before Internet it was TV. Before TV it was cars. Before cars it was industry. Before industry it was books.
Someone probably was anti cave paintings because it ruined the skill of passing down the stories by word of mouth.
Something is always coming along that is both horrible for society as it is and something we come to accept as common place. You can want to return to our roots but even that I guarantee you would still pick some level of technology you don’t want to do without.


My worry is that the people we need engaged on AI because they have a healthy mindset to question and wrangle it, are instead being forced to ignore AI or pledge to be anti AI by their social circles and customers.
So instead we have absolute Kool aid drinkers driving the AI adoption.
We went through this with the internet but I think a lot of folks now are too young to remember it and unsurprisingly the people who were anti internet didn’t store their concerns and complaints in the currently used modern repository of all knowledge.


YuzuKey flavored verification cans can keep you authenticated for 2 to 8 hours.


Everything is guessing, only death is certain. I’ve worked with AI/ML for over 15 years long before folks got all hot and bothered by it. Your examples you give are great because if you walked up to a person and just said 5 you might get as random of answers and you gave.
Assuming by AI you mean LLMs, because that is what is hot on social media today, they use statistical probability models to be able to rate their input to output consistency. It is measurable but could never be 100%. No compute or person is 100%, but an LLM is orders of magnitude less consistent than traditional compute.
I use AI on a daily basis. I trust it less than people, but I also am able to feed it dumb questions which is nice.


AI is any compute model performing complex enough reasoning that the output does not always resemble the input. They are by definition non deterministic and the same ask can provide different outputs without being influenced by other inputs.


It is hardware. The embargo is on the connectivity silicon used in China because it is full of Chinese backdoors. Unlike the chips made elsewhere that have US backdoors


Making everything run ontop of an LLM was not non deterministic enough. Now with the power of cosmic rays we can guarantee the most non deterministic system possible. With such an unknown state we may finally achieve garbage in sometimes not garbage out compute. Invest in typewriters and monkeys today and you could be a partial owner of the entire works of Shakespeare soon™.
The fact that consumers have LLM garbage shoved in their face doesn’t mean that the exponential increase in other ML use cases isn’t driving life saving technology. The COVID vaccine only deployed as fast as it did because of AI ML. 20% of surgeries right now are robot assisted and all of those use AI ML.
On a personal level I’ve been able to move my family to FOSS because of LLMs. LLMs are very good at understanding how open source software works and translating the workflows to human language. I personally can read man pages but others in my family honestly don’t want to have to in order to just watch a show on AppleTV. I can do this with a small local LLM running on a low wattage micro server.
We are seeing LLMs enabling us easily to overwrite the proprietary software in our home devices and take back hardware and improve repairability so we can stop producing so much E Waste. And the more that companies use LLM code to slop up their embedded devices the easier it becomes.
You can run AI without causing environmental problems just like you can drive cars without burning fossil fuels and you can have industrial production without creating pollutants.
All of that just cuts into the profits though.
Year of the Linux desktop pushed out a year due to Linux infighting and intolerable advocates for the 33rd year. Clearly the fault of the other distros as I use Arch.


Would you rather our current administration make their decisions by using the lowest bidder LLM, or their own brains?


Why is your hobby more important than their hobby?


Yea but if someone uses those bindings then you can’t just not support it.
By the time this code gets into a large scale production system it will be 2029. That is when the bugs will come in if someone leveraged the Rust bindings.
You can ask the big company users at that time to contribute their fixes upstream, but if they get resistance because they have relatively junior Rust devs trying to push up changes that only a handful of maintainers understand, the company will just stop upstreaming their changes.
The primary concern that a major open source project like this will have is that the major contributors will decide that interacting with it is more trouble than it is worth. That is how open source projects move to being passion projects and then die when the passion dies.


Yea and if the Rust developers don’t show up to the show? Rust is a baby and it has done so little on its own. This isn’t a neat little side project, this is code that a major vendor will want to take up and will demand be maintained. There are implications on a global scale.


It’s mostly in that linked thread. The high level of it is a guy wanted to push Rust code. The maintainer said no it would mean the API for this would be tied to Rust and that is unacceptable. It cause another big contributer to throw a fit and Linus said he can’t be everyone’s mom. They kept fighting for like 2 months apparently? Now Linus stepped in, looked at the code and said the Rust code clearly doesn’t impact the API in the way the maintainer was saying it just breaks itself if the maintainers allow changes to the API.
I kinda dislike the idea that it’s cool for people to contribute code that is so easy to break. I have a feeling after it happens a few times they are going to claim that it is being done intentionally and that the slap fights will carry on.


Linus shouldn’t have to get involved at all. Each part of the Kernel should be handled independently by the maintainers. Linus responding publicly to outside forces is fine but once he has to step in to handle public fights between individuals who are supposed to work together it is a problem.
Linux staying C focused is a valid thing to do. It is very hard to get folks to contribute to the kernel and if you cut out anyone who doesn’t know Rust, a language with at best 5% the adoption rate of C, you will run into spots where sections of the kernel are unmaintained due to no willing and qualified person covering it.
Adding Rust based functionality and support is great. Changing APIs to require maintainers to learn Rust to continue to maintain the code they are experts in is unacceptable.


I think this looks great. I’m not going to run a 20 foot USB cable accross my living room so wireless is pretty much a must. I think the only concern I have is if it discharges if I store it and if so what the bringup time would be.
The average tax income from billionaires in california looks to be around 10million a year. So combined the about 200 billionaires in california are paying 2 billion a year. Rough numbers would be that is 150 of them left then the one time tax would start being a negative income in 10 years. That assumes money stays flat.
Honestly there is no way that this ends up being a serious net negative and these folks are still operating in California enough that they may fail to avoid residency review.