I’m not sure. I started using Codex last week. Codex, at $20/mo is a very good value.
Indeed! For now let's enjoy it as much as we can. The VC-subsidized price of $20 won't last eternally I'm afraid
Readit Newsotagekki commented on How will OpenAI compete? ben-evans.com/benedicteva... · Posted by u/iamskeole
otagekki commented on Japan Post launches 'digital address' system japantimes.co.jp/business... · Posted by u/jmsflknr
This could actually be extremely convenient to use in many parts of Africa where place simply do not have addresses. Right now what we do is latitude longitude, which works wonders but can a bit clunky especially in cities
otagekki commented on France Endorses UN Open Source Principles social.numerique.gouv.fr/... · Posted by u/bzg
Read "Everything I Want To Do Is Illegal: War Stories from the Local Food Front" by Joel Salatin to learn about what the government did to farmers. The simple truth is you won't even have the ability to ask to be hired, because it will be illegal to demonstrate your skills in the first place.
I haven't read that book, but asked for a summary.
Honestly, I cannot see software being regulated the same way as food industry is, for the very simple reason that software can trivially cross borders (legally or not) while food cannot. Regulating that industry to prevent any progress by erecting bureaucratic barriers in a given country will just kill the industry in that country and make it thrive elsewhere where it's less regulated. As a result, the regulation-freak country will lose any of its competitive advantages due to lesser efficiency.
Doing this on a global scale requires "CFC-ban"-levels of global coordination which I cannot see happening in the world we live in today. Just look at how global CO2 reduction and climate change is being handled today at the global scale.
otagekki commented on France Endorses UN Open Source Principles social.numerique.gouv.fr/... · Posted by u/bzg
The government getting interested in open source should terrify us all. The UN formally defining principles for what it means is a soft form of regulation that's only going to get more authoritarian over time. Traveling down this road, we're going to find ourselves living in a world where you're only allowed to share software if (1) you're working for a corporation, or (2) you're working for the government. Because (1) and (2) will have their lives managed and regulated and won't do anything they're not told to do. Anyone who wants to be a hobbyist who writes code of their own free will and shares it on GitHub just for fun will be criminalized, just like anyone today who wants to do farming just for fun is criminalized. Once they make these principles part of the law, it'll grow like the tax code, and be enforced. You used C and didn't write documentation? You're outlawed! Believe me when I say the government is not here to help. Code is speech and there'll be no freedom left the day our right to share what we've written in our preferred language in our own preferred way is taken away.
Really? It is up to them if they want to use what I wrote. Why would I get fined or jailed for not writing documentation? Good luck trying to prove any wrongdoing. If you want support feel free to hire me to do that, or just do it yourself, pretty much like big tech is doing right now with open source
otagekki commented on Anyone can access deleted and private repository data on GitHub trufflesecurity.com/blog/... · Posted by u/__0x1__
A serious security issue indeed, if someone knows the hash.
How I manage this is that every time I want to open-source a previously private feature, I take the changeset diff and apply that to the files in the public repository. Same features, but plausibly different hash.
otagekki commented on Retrograde Earth Maps and Climate old.reddit.com/r/worldbui... · Posted by u/otagekki
Assumedly made by the author of The climate of retrograde Earth (https://esd.copernicus.org/articles/9/1191/2018/) with some discussion at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21295729, but with much better graphic and much more detailed Koppen climate map.
otagekki commented on CentOS Linux 7 will reach EOL on Sunday redhat.com/en/topics/linu... · Posted by u/fh973
Transitioning from CentOS 7 to RedHat 8 and 9 at my former company's private cloud has smooth for most teams, pareto-style, with 80% of migration-related incidents caused by the 20% of the teams that did some really weird changes to the VM's OS that was no longer allowed under RHEL 8 or 9.
At first, I thought it was just to reduce the complexity of managing hardening rules for several OS and OS versions.
otagekki commented on ChatGPT turned generative AI into an “anything tool” arstechnica.com/ai/2023/0... · Posted by u/CharlesW
I'm not making an argument for Ludditism.
I'm making an argument that we need new laws, different than the current ones, which are predicated on current supply limitations and scarcity.
And that those new laws should redirect some profits from models to those whose work they were trained on during the temporary dislocation period.
And separately... that lobotomizing our human artistic talent pool is going to have the same effect that replacing our human journalism talent pool did. But that's a different topic.
For the AI/Robot tax, the pessimistic view is that the legal state of the world is such that such tax can and will be evaded. Now not only the LLMs put humans out of a job because an LLM or a SD model mimicks their work, but the financial gains have now been hidden away in tax havens through tax evasion schemes designed by AIs. And even if through some counter-AIs we manage to funnel the financial gains back to the people, what is now the incentive for capital owners to invest and keep investing in cutting-edge AI, if the profits are now so meagre to justify the investment?
otagekki commented on ChatGPT turned generative AI into an “anything tool” arstechnica.com/ai/2023/0... · Posted by u/CharlesW
Law exists to benefit humans.
Either directly (outlawing murder) or indirectly (providing for roads and bridges). And well (libraries) or poorly (modern copyright law).
But fundamentally, law benefits people.
Most modern economic perversions are a consequence of taking laws which benefit people (e.g. free speech) and overzealously applying them to non-people entities (e.g. corporations).
So "why [is it] ok for [a] human to learn from a prior art, but not for a LLM"?
Because a human has fundamental output limitations (parallel capacity, time, lifespan) and a machine does not.
Existing laws aren't the way they are because they encode universal truths -- they're instead the consensus reached between multiple competing interests and intrinsically rooted in the possible bounds of current reality.
"This is a fair copyright system" isn't constant with respect to varying supply and demand. It's linked directly to bounds on those quantities.
E.g. music distribution rights, when suddenly home network bandwidth increased enough to transfer large quantities of music files
Or, to put it another shorter way, the current system and source-blind model output fucks over artists.
And artists are humans. And LLMs are not.
> Because a human has fundamental output limitations (parallel capacity, time, lifespan) and a machine does not.
Industrialization as we know it would have never happened if we artificially limit progress, just so that people could still have jobs. I guess you could hold the same kind of argument for the copists, when printing became widespread; for horses before the automobile; or telephone operators before switches got automated. Guess what they have become now. Art made by humans can still exist although its output will be marginal compared to AI-generated art.
LLMs are not humans but are used by humans. In the end the beneficiary is still a human.