I would argue that if I ask ChatGPT something, it doesnt "reproduce" what was written on certain website (or at least it shouldn', without attribution). It takes what it scrapped before and re-tell it in its own words. That isn't reproducing, looks like a grey area not yet addressed in copyright laws.
I would partially agree with the guy, that yes, that was a social contract since 90's, but before the AI era. Back then this use case wasn't anticipated.
I must admit that I use awk only via GPT-4, which will write me the one-liner I need and I just run it. I somewhat cannot remember the syntax, provided I use the tool only occasionally.
I too hope this will be rejected, the proposal is terrible. One of the core advantages of Go was, that if newbie colleague comes to the team, he will be able to read and understand the code very quickly. Things like this will over time kill this Go's advantage.
Of course, depends on the wrist. It just feels very small to me. I alternate between W-217H, which is a bit larger version, or Casio Duro, which feels like ok size for me, but that's analog.
Ok, I just wanted to say that certain models would allow more things to be displayed, like W-800H for example. I actually own F-91W for nostalgia, but it's like a boy watch.
"kill a platform" is an overstatement, isn't it? I follow several dozens people at twitter and they are all there, posting regularly as before. Honestly, I didn't notice any degradation of twitter during Musk era. There is Andrew Tate shitposting now, and for a few hours twitter logo was changed to Doge, but what else?
For customers it is quite good, but to be fair, Netflix cancellation process is very straightforward, at least in Europe. There weren't any tricks, they just said see you later and cancelled.
Interestingly, it seems to me Elon was mostly right. Overall, twitter is doing just fine, everything runs for me, influencers from the fields I follow like AI or software engineering are still there, still posting regularly. From people I follow, I didn't notice anyone leaving.
I was always intrigued about this concept, but when I wanted to try it in some specific area, let's say programming in specific language, or writing blog posts, I couldn't find more specific info how exactly would the training performed. Is there some template, which I can use to design deliberate practice training for X?
Golang is quite good in this regard:
- language itself is quite simple
- default coding style was defined at the very beginning
- usually there is one standard way to do something
- the language do not have so-called "syntactic sugar"
It's not a joke, it's true. Your code is nice, but the problem is, that Perl doesn't enforce any kind of readability; some other languages also don't but Perl is worst in this aspect, and that makes it unusable for anything bigger. New programmer will not understand the code or his colleague at the first glance, and at least in corporate environment, there are always new and junior programmers.
This is strange, I tried it a few times via Poe app, where they integrated it recently, and the results were very weak. Good alternative to Bing is phind.com in my opinion.
1) he is truly scared AI can become dangerous and try to distribute the responsibility to more people
2) he anticipates that there will be some regulation anyway, and when that's the case, it is better to be involved and act friendly.
You mean Claude bot in general? For me, yes, I use it daily, and comparing to GPT, it answers more quickly, more friendly and in general it is less woke. I use gpt-4 as a fallback, when I need more reasoning capabilities, there GPT-4 is better. To sum it up, if you find GPT-3.5&4 useful, then yes, Claude is useful as well.
Exactly. For example John Carmack understands AGI as an simulation of 2-year old human brain, which we can teach anything. That's quite a good definition imo, but it seems to me this isn't achievable by evolution of LLMs. Other people thinks that by making current LLMs approach somewhat better, that could be called AGI. To sum it up, AGI isn't anything specific at this point.
I use both ChatGPT and API. Mostly I would say I use it for work and when I learn Chinese, and Claude is in my mobile via Poe app, which I use for more casual talk or when I know the answer doesn't require advanced reasoning. Then I also use phind.com website, which I would say is like a better Bing (at least for programming queries).
Yes and no. Or, yes for such use cases you mentioned, also it is miles ahead in reasoning capability, translations from Chinese, etc. etc. But still, for more casual talk, like bouncing ideas, brainstorming etc., I prefer Claude. It's kind of more "friendly", less formal, and, which is sometimes also important, much quicker.
But if we look at the "mainstream" usage, like English-language thought leaders, they are still there, still posting regularly. Like for example in the AI field, all relevant people are on twitter.
Also, I very much like their chatbots, Claude-instant and (paid) Claude+, which are available via Poe.com. But for some reasons, they do almost no marketing for it. Gpt-4 has better reasoning capabilities, but Claude+ is somehow "more pleasant" to talk to (my subjective impression), and it can also assemble the answer much quicker. Overall, I'd say Anthropic is very advanced already, but they prefer to be under radar.