The Apache license also says "You must give any other recipients of the Work or Derivative Works a copy of this License".
2,692 karma · joined November 7, 2012
The Apache license also says "You must give any other recipients of the Work or Derivative Works a copy of this License".
> the reader emits the model's shape rather than the file's
Oh hello Claude
It's one thing to have AI-written software, where the code isn't the consumable; and quite another to have AI-written essays that are intended to engage a human's critical thinking.
I am very tired of it all.
I don't think I can tolerate its writing style anymore. Reading Claude output is starting to cause actual psychological harm. I have tried many ways to get it to stop writing in its stupid punchy linked-in marketing-team voice, and I can't.
Is there a model out there that sounds sound this awful? It's like rubbing sand into the folds of my brain.
Lol. The author is the creator of Rails
The authors may be open to dual-licensing
I will never, ever, work with Freshworks, Freshdesk, Freshservice, or any of their other products as a direct result of this.
> Six steps, no jargon. The note beside each one is the precise technical version, for anyone who wants to check the work.
It actually makes me uncomfortable reading this garbage now.
These guys would be screwed if they were operating under the EU AI Act.
I think OpenAI would be very reluctant to let this go to a place where the reasoning was part of discovery.
This use of language is very hard to reconcile with the "AI is just a tool" rhetoric that many use.
Did the models do this, or did humans at OpenAI do this using the models?
OpenAI gained access to HuggingFaces production database ffs.
If I'm not alone, I presume that might skew your results.
I presume you mean Anthropic-OpenAI-Google?