get_flat_ccs_offset() reads the base of the flat CCS storage from the
hardware, scales it by the number of enabled L3 nodes, and rounds the
result up to 128K. Everything below that offset is then ...
Not really. It’s still not ethical to exploit the labor of others, even when our favorite computer nerd does it.
Ultimately the working people who created the data that was used to train the AI have not given consent and were not compensated for their work. Instead, Linus is paying money (probably the Linux Foundations’ money?) to a large corporation that is exploiting the unpaid work, skills and culture of human beings.
In ethics the ends don’t often justify the means.
Not to mention it’s unclear what the LLM even did to help debug this issue, because he seems to suggest it lead him him astray multiple times claiming that it was impossible to fix.
Because it’s very much not a person, and it didn’t learn anything.
A for-profit corporation simply scraped the net and fed a bunch of other people’s work (the direct result of human labor) into a system of biased nodes and anthropomorphized it by calling it “intelligence” and “learning”.
This is exploitation of labor of the working and creative class, nothing more, nothing less.
It doesn’t have the agency of a human being, nor does have the creativity or individual perspective of one. It has no senses of it’s own or lived experiences to draw from, and it is not sentient. Furthermore, it doesn’t interact with the world or economy like a human being, it does not create things like a human being, and if has no human rights or even copyrights.
LLMs are not people, no matter how some people choose to treat them.
I am not a person inclined to believe copyright is entirely useful in the first place; but it is very illuminating that people of a certain class can essentially get away with mass theft under copyright law and be allowed to repackage that data and juice the market with the thing they’ve made using it and meanwhile average people are very much indeed beholden to copyright in public use cases where money is involved. Its especially crooked when you consider how the public is subsidizing so many of the underlying infrastructural costs of such a massively inefficient tool. We live in a welfare state, the average person just isn’t the benefactor of it. Things haven’t actually changed too much since feudalism.
A for-profit corporation simply scraped the net and fed a bunch of other people’s work (the direct result of human labor) into a system of biased nodes and anthropomorphized it by calling it “intelligence” and “learning”.
I’m interested in how you know this when it didn’t state what LLM was used. Ethically trained models exist.
But regardless, the function isn’t very different. Both ingest works made by other people and produce something using those works as reference materials.
The mechanisms in which this is achieved might be different, but they’d have to be since we’re dealing with binary switches instead of cells. But people tend to forget that neural networks are an attempt at programmatically mimicking the way the human brain works.
The human brain is just a meat computer, after all.
Stack Overflow was always about sharing your learning and knowledge with other humans. Just like open source. We didn’t anticipate, and didn’t give permission, for it being used to train AI.
So the problem is that silicone is doing it instead of carbon?
We dont even know what LLM he used. It’s entirely possible it’s an ethically trained model. I know for a fact that Amazon has ones that were trained on licensed works. Adobe has one for image gen too.
Not really. It’s still not ethical to exploit the labor of others, even when our favorite computer nerd does it.
Ultimately the working people who created the data that was used to train the AI have not given consent and were not compensated for their work. Instead, Linus is paying money (probably the Linux Foundations’ money?) to a large corporation that is exploiting the unpaid work, skills and culture of human beings.
In ethics the ends don’t often justify the means.
Not to mention it’s unclear what the LLM even did to help debug this issue, because he seems to suggest it lead him him astray multiple times claiming that it was impossible to fix.
How is that functionally different than a person who learned to code for free on Stack Overflow?
Because it’s very much not a person, and it didn’t learn anything.
A for-profit corporation simply scraped the net and fed a bunch of other people’s work (the direct result of human labor) into a system of biased nodes and anthropomorphized it by calling it “intelligence” and “learning”.
This is exploitation of labor of the working and creative class, nothing more, nothing less.
It doesn’t have the agency of a human being, nor does have the creativity or individual perspective of one. It has no senses of it’s own or lived experiences to draw from, and it is not sentient. Furthermore, it doesn’t interact with the world or economy like a human being, it does not create things like a human being, and if has no human rights or even copyrights.
LLMs are not people, no matter how some people choose to treat them.
I am not a person inclined to believe copyright is entirely useful in the first place; but it is very illuminating that people of a certain class can essentially get away with mass theft under copyright law and be allowed to repackage that data and juice the market with the thing they’ve made using it and meanwhile average people are very much indeed beholden to copyright in public use cases where money is involved. Its especially crooked when you consider how the public is subsidizing so many of the underlying infrastructural costs of such a massively inefficient tool. We live in a welfare state, the average person just isn’t the benefactor of it. Things haven’t actually changed too much since feudalism.
I’m interested in how you know this when it didn’t state what LLM was used. Ethically trained models exist.
But regardless, the function isn’t very different. Both ingest works made by other people and produce something using those works as reference materials.
The mechanisms in which this is achieved might be different, but they’d have to be since we’re dealing with binary switches instead of cells. But people tend to forget that neural networks are an attempt at programmatically mimicking the way the human brain works.
The human brain is just a meat computer, after all.
Stack Overflow was always about sharing your learning and knowledge with other humans. Just like open source. We didn’t anticipate, and didn’t give permission, for it being used to train AI.
So the problem is that silicone is doing it instead of carbon?
We dont even know what LLM he used. It’s entirely possible it’s an ethically trained model. I know for a fact that Amazon has ones that were trained on licensed works. Adobe has one for image gen too.