This seems less about frontier models and restriction and more just lack of compute capacity to meet demand. This has always been an issue for large clients running on cloud, though not to this extent.
Can you explain what your point really was then? Belittling the idea of hotlines seemed central in your messaging and the possible exploitation of data more of a secondary thing.
It's fine to be cynical but it's also good to remember that there are real people that do care and try to improve the world as well.
My (personally) humorous interpretation was that they were extending your joke by implying the only users using FF are devs and they are the ones that care.
> Why invent "safety" practices and ignore every documented software engineering best practice?
That seems unnecessarily brutal (and untrue).
> 2,000 line long modules and 200-line methods with 3-4 if-levels are considered harmful
Sometimes, not always. Limiting file size arbitrarily is not "best practice". There are times where keeping the context in one place lowers the cognitive complexity in understanding the logic. If these functions are logically tightly related splitting them out into multiple files will likely make things worse. 2000 lines (a lot of white space and comments) isn't crazy at all for a complicated piece of business logic.
> Comments that say what the code does instead of specifying why are similarly not useful and likely to go out of date with the actual code.
I don't think this is a clear cut best practice either. A comment that explains that you set var a to parameter b is useless, but it can have utility if the "what" adds more context, which seems to be the case in this file from skimming it. There's code and there's business logic and comments can act as translation between the two without necessarily being the why.
> Gratuitous use of `nil`
Welcome to golang. `nil` for error values is standard.
I'm not saying you're entitled to a paycheck - a company has the right to fire you for your differences in politics. But if you frame it as a relationship, communication can help both sides as long as it's done with some mutual understanding. There are times companies listen to their employees and change their stance. And if they don't then you still have the ability to leave. That said it also matters how differences in views are expressed, I doubt there are many cases where yelling is effective..
A lot of work can be inherently political. If your company pivots into mass surveillance is it unreasonable to speak up if it's against your ethics framework?
Isn't having a private entity be able to do what previously required a nation a good sign for that nation? The idea that the USA cannot re-obtain that capability again seems silly to me and there are a lot of pros for having private companies pushing the state of art forward.
Yeah.. but do you think most ultra-rich elite are pushing against entropy or contributing more to it or at best staying neutral while further growing their wealth?
For certain things I think so. For me the fascinating and really useful utility of LLMs is their ability to synthesize answers to questions. This is something search generally speaking can't do. I find myself using ChatGPT to answer question like:
> Explain tar -xzvf
> Answer:
The command tar -xzvf is used to extract a tar archive. Here is what each option does:
-x: This option tells tar to extract the contents of the archive.
-z: This option tells tar to decompress the archive using gzip compression.
-v: This option tells tar to run in verbose mode, which means it will display the names of the files being extracted as they are extracted.
-f: This option specifies the file name of the archive that you want to extract.
So, the full command tar -xzvf is used to extract a tar archive that has been compressed with gzip and display the names of the files being extracted as they are extracted.
However for other types of information I much more care about being taken to a trustworthy source of information rather seeing a summarized view or worse, a synthesized view of various sources that might not agree with each other. References are useful, but it's risky to rely on what a bot says without validating the references at which point the utility of the bot for that type of query is questionable.
Cool, but can you give some concrete examples so it doesn't sound like you're being extremely hyperbolic?
> Even adapting to the new world order puts their primary revenue stream at risk.
Even if Bing and Google end up having similar LLM chat capabilities with Bing being first to deliver, would it be enough to get Google users to move to Bing?
The current business models need to be more than being able to converse with a chatbot. Ads will still need to be integrated and they might come off a lot worse when integrated into a conversation. It's definitely interesting times but I don't see how it's a new world order yet.
Then you would encourage people to have behaviors that trend towards criminal so they would get paid.
But I agree with the thrust of the idea - investing that money in reducing factors that would cause people to turn to crime is a good idea. I assume it's already being done but maybe not as effectively as we would hope?
I can't speak for large games but the Bevy build-run loop is quite fast for smallish games (say 10k loc). Certainly more pleasant than say Python or JS where it starts fast and then you spent five iterations fixing errors Rust's type & ownership systems would have caught.