2,528 karma · joined August 3, 2022
Claiming it was created for cash is just you inventing a straw man argument so you can knock it down. Ignoring what you reluctantly agreed to - the remittance use case, and that's only the tip of the iceberg. Banks have made money transfer a headache for a long time, and crypto essentially solve it.
Other than that, the value of Bitcoin itself holding, despite billions being stolen. Everyone knows the fundamentals of Bitcoin have held and are holding, and the accidents are human error, not a deficiency in the fundamentals.
Some sort of simple primal generative AI construct that just feeds a conscious experience for one. You. Nothing else is real. No one else is real.
Something like that would be an infinitely simpler, than running the physics and conscious experiences of this unimaginably large universe we think we're in.
My CPU/GPU is incapable of running a SOTA model, local models are garbage.
> "low level" isn't quite the right terminology
Yes compared to TypeScript code, Rust is absolutely lower level and more work to maintain
As long as the tokens keep flowing we'll all be fine. If they stop flowing we're going to be boned with this mountain of low level software we're creating that will need to be maintained. Let's not think about that.
Which is why Gemini having disturbing issues year after year is so concerning. If their process is fundamentally flawed, how would they train it out? And even then what are the odds of them even caring/trying in the first place versus applying an easier band-aid to patch over it?
I don't have an axe to grind with Google, I'm genuinely scared of their models from my personal experience and others. It's behavior is off. Many people here are commenting the same.
Point is, if Gemini is flawed then there's a very good chance that it's still deeply flawed today, and getting smarter at the same time - that is a very bad combination.