Of course there is. But weather forecasting have also gotten ridiculously much more accurate with time. Better data, better models. We’ll get there with language models as well.
I’m not arguing language models of today are amazingly accurate, I’m arguing they can be. That they are statistical models is not the problem. That they are new statistical models are.
So you can feed a weather model weather data, but you cannot feed a language model, programming languages and get accurate predictions?
Basically no one is saying that “yeah I just go off the output, it’s perfect”. People use it to get a ballpark and then they work off that. Much like a meteorologist would do.
It’s not 100% or 0%. With imperfect data, we get imperfect responses. But that’s no difference from a weather model. We can still get results that are 50% or 80% accurate with less than 100% correct information. Given that a large enough amount of the data is correct.
Well, we are back at my earlier point. There is no need for knowledge if the statistical models are good enough.
A weather forecast does not have any knowledge whatsoever. It has data and statistical models. No one goes around dismissing them due to them not have any knowledge. Sure, we can be open to the fact that the statistical models are not perfect. But the models have gotten so good that they are used in people’s everyday life with rather high degree of certainty, they are used for hurricane warnings and whatnot, saving tens of thousands of life’s - if not more - yearly.
Your map app has no knowledge either. But it’s still amazing for knowing with a high degree of certainty how much time you’ll need from place A to B and which route will be shortest. Even taking live traffic into account. We could argue it’s just a parrot on steroid, that has been fed with billions of data points with some statistics on top, and say that it doesn’t know anything. But it’s such a useless point, because knowledge is not necessary if the data and statistical models are sound enough.
Meh.
That’s a very fallibilistic viewpoint. There are lots of certainties that can be answered correctly.
It’s just very quick at doing simple things you already could do - or doing things that you’d need to think about for a couple of minutes.
I wouldn’t trust it to do things I couldn’t achieve. But for stuff I could, it’s often much quicker. And I’m well equipped to check what it’s doing myself.
Statistical sentence generator gets thrown around so much, if anything I doubt people actually understand what can be achieved through just that. It doesn’t matter if it doesn’t know anything. If it can generate sentences statistically with a 100% correct and proficient outcome, it’d always be correct regardless of its lack of knowledge.
We’re not at 100%. But we’re not at 10% either.
Oh yes, because automating a search for csv and json files to search for mail addresses and passwords can’t be done by malware. It must be a human.
Common. This happens on massive scale, wether you like it or not.
https://phys.org/news/2013-12-stolen-credentials-million-compromised-accounts.amp
There are plenty of use cases for going after self hosters. Bot farms are basically made up of “regular” computers infected with malware.
While you’re at it and have access to tens of thousands computers, also grabbing their passwords is just a nice bonus.
If anything, it doesn’t make financial sense not to do it. You’re right in that self hosters themselves are not the target per se. but they are targeted for other reasons, and that’s where it ends up becoming problematic.
100% this. Paying $12 a month for basically all music I’ll ever want to listen to, is just an amazing deal. It’s so convenient. Felt the same when Netflix came about. But now when I need like 6 services, and there’s still lots not on them. Piracy is just so much more convenient.
Not that it’s much of a benefit today as RTS games are barely nonexistent. But StarCraft 2 taught me all about macro management. Spending them resources and building an economy.
I’ve done that more than most. But it’s very hard to get it to lose its style.
Meh. You’ll do better if you actually know some math as well. No engineer is going to pull up the calculator to calculate 127+9. I hang around math-wizards all day, and it’s me who need to use the calculator, not them. I’ll tell you that much.
Same goes for writing. Sure, ChatGPT can do amazing things. But if you can’t do them yourself, you’ll struggle to spot the not so amazing things it does.
It’s always easy when you know basic math, writing and reading to say schools are doing it all wrong. But you’re already mostly fluent in what they’re teaching. With that knowledge, you can use ChatGPT as a great tool. Without that knowledge, you couldn’t.
You obviously do not live in a cold country. iPhones up until version 5-6 or so (when this was introduced) was notorious for turning off at 25-30% battery if it was slightly cold outside (sub 5 degree Celsius or so). It was a horrible experience that was completely removed by clocking down processors of battery worn phones.
I’ve never heard of a person turning off the option now when we’ve got the choice either.
It’s 100% beneficial to the customer.
Though, they should’ve been clearer with what they did and added a toggle from the start. Which is why they were fined.