[-] abessman@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Repeating it doesn’t make it true. As long as the code is released under a FOSS license, the development model doesn’t matter.

[-] abessman@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

DRM has absolutely nothing do to with this.

[-] abessman@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

I will say directly that this model of governance is incompatible with the tenets of free software.

Which of the four freedoms does it fall short of?

[-] abessman@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago

Their existence is far more constant than heavily urbanized areas.

Certainly not. Moderately urbanized areas are a historical footnote. They came into existence less than a century ago, with the emergence of automobilism and cheap fuel.

Heavily urbanized areas have existed for millenia.

This is highly unrealistic. Most people do not want to be packed in tighter with other people, they want more space not less.

The alternative is that they stop existing altogether when personal automobiles become too expensive for the average consumer to own and operate.

[-] abessman@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I’m talking about moderately urbanized places (which there are a lot more of).

Such places exist as a direct consequence of car culture. Their existence is not a universal constant; they can and must be turned into heavily urbanized areas.

[-] abessman@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago

What kind of vehicle do you think usually pulls up to a loading dock?

Grocery stores inside cities do not have loading docks. Their goods are typically delivered by this type of vehicle to curb-side offloading sites during off-peak hours.

[-] abessman@lemmy.world 31 points 7 months ago

18 wheelers are not last mile delivery vehicles and have no business being in cities to begin with.

[-] abessman@lemmy.world 29 points 11 months ago

What is a gif keyboard? What's wrong with copy and pasting from ~/Pictures/memes/?

(Yes, I realize my old is showing)

[-] abessman@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Ah, right you are. I'm surprised they're able to get the kind of results described in the article out of GPT-J. I've tinkered with it a bit myself, and it's nowhere near GTP-3.5 in terms of "intelligence". Haven't tried it for programming though; might be that it's better at that than general chat.

[-] abessman@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

Everything.

Every programming language is an abstraction layer between the programmer and the machine that will run the code. But abstraction isn't free. Generally speaking, the higher the abstraction, the less efficient the program.

C++ optionally provides a much higher level of abstraction than pure C, which makes C++ much nicer to work with. But the trade off is that the program will struggle to run in resource constrained environments, where a program written in C would run just fine.

And to be clear, when I say "low-end hardware", I'm not talking about the atom-based netbook from 2008 you picked up for $15 at a yard sale. It will run C++ based programs just fine. I'm talking about 8- or 16-bit microcontrollers running at <100 MHz with a couple of hundred kB of RAM. Such machines are still common in many embedded applications, and they do not handle C++ applications gracefully.

[-] abessman@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago

Is it using chatgpt as a backend, like most so called chatgpt "alternatives"? If so, it will get banned soon enough.

If not, it seems extremely impressive, and extremely costly to create. I wonder who's behind it, in that case.

[-] abessman@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

I mean yeah, if you restrict yourself to the C part of C++ it can do everything C can. But then you're not getting any of the advantages of C++.

Once you start using things like classes and templates heavily, your program will quickly outgrow low-end hardware.

view more: next ›

abessman

joined 1 year ago