If the reason of the accident was responsibility of the user and then blamed the company, then I think is fair.
Especially like people in the US where people use the auto-drive function completely unattended, just to blame the company later.
-13 karma · joined January 7, 2025
Especially like people in the US where people use the auto-drive function completely unattended, just to blame the company later.
Just put a bad score and ask for refund. Amazon does a good job here as you never interact with the seller
Most of the time, they just resell products from factories who didn't pass the quality tests.
Drugs for depression get addictive as your body gets instant reward by the pill.
It's sad to see many 1st world countries becoming too dependent of them, instead of achieving happiness and personal goals
Yet another dead law. This is like asking a criminal to not use weapons.
Not paying for this. Please use some archive website if you are sharing selome article.
Most of their latest shows are just bad and not original et all.
Meanwhile, Germans pay with cash and credit cards are very unpopular because the German government sniffs every single transaction.
Europeans think they are pro freedom, but their idea of freedom begins by getting the government over them 24/7.
Rocketchat is mostly a clone of Slack for a quarter of the price.
Teams may not be the exact solution but brings Sharepoint, OneDrive and Outlook into a same place. For most companies using Microsoft 365 is great as you can comply with security policies and easily collaborate and join meeting groups with other companies without extra accounts.
Slack works fine for engineering teams, but still very expensive and not much professional for the corporate world.
Why are you protecting Slack business?
Even at my company I was in charge to replace Slack because is damn expensive in comparison to other options like Teams or Rocket Chat.
That means, everything you do as a long term solution, needs to be approved by executive, legislative and judiciary systems. This is how every healthy Democratic Republic works.
If you have policies made by executive order, it means only executive power have approved them, which is partially an autocratic policy. This is not new, and constantly abused by Democrats and Republicans over the year.
Because USAID was created by Autocratic rule and did not passed by legislative and/or judiciary approval, I think it's fair to be dismissed by any other president, congress or judiciary any time.
If the people think the government should keep growing up and spending lot more tax payer money, sure, but make it approved by the people, not by the president (or prime minister at other countries).
For instance, discussing or questioning Nazism is illegal in Germany but allowed in many other countries. Should every LLMs be restricted globally just because Germany deems it illegal?
Similarly, certain drugs are legal in the Netherlands but illegal in other countries, sometimes even punishable by death. How do you handle such discrepancies?
Let's face it: most of the time, LLMs follow US-centric anti-racism guidelines, which aren't as prominent or necessary in many parts of the world. Many countries have diverse populations without significant racial tensions like United States and don't prioritize African, Asian, or Latino positivity to the same extent.
Moreover, in the US, discussions about the First or Second Amendment are common, even among those with opposing views, but free speech and gun rights are taboo in other societies. How do you reconcile this?
In practical terms, if an LLM refuses to answer questions because they're illegal in some countries, users will likely use uncensored models instead, rendering the restricted ones less useful. This is why censorship is never successful except by North Korea and China.
Take Stable Diffusion as an example: the most popular versions (1.5, XL, Pony) are flexible for unrestricted use, whereas intentionally censored versions (like 2.1 or 3.0) have seen limited adoption.
Bad players are so desperate to cheat in order to win. They don't belive at fair competitions, but instead will use any dirty trick to win.
And this is also why most online games are full of invasive anti-cheat crap.
The law will only ensure good companies like MistralAI or Black Forest Labs will stay in the shadow.
This is same idiocy like the Republican senator who wants to prohibit Deepseek usage in US.
About legality, what's the illegal thing AI shouldn't do? Many of that knowledge can be accessible already from books, even how to build weapons or explosives
Do European politicians understand that those laws are usually dead? There is no way a law like that can be enforced except by large companies.
Also, this kind of laws would make Europeans to stay at the loser side of the AI competition as China and mostly every US corporation doesn't care about that.
Deepseek 8b is based on Meta's Llama3
I would say 70b doesn't worth the cost in comparison to 32b except coding... but if you want a model for coding, then you should try a model specifically trained for that, like Deepseek-Coder or Mistral's Codestral.
Deepseek-r1 is considered a general use AI. It would do good enough at many topics but won't excel on everything.
The good thing of 32B is being as good as 70B at many benchmarks according to Deepseek documentation
https://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-R1#distilled-mod...
Anything lower than 10 t/s is going to give lot of wait time considering the reasoning wait time
Try asking ChatGPT or Meta's Llama 3 about genders or certain crime statistics. It will refuse to answer
What country A wants to do is totally different that country B wants.
Some western countries are freezing as they are investing hard in solar/wind plants, while China makes ton of carbon plants.
No way I'm reading this.
If there is no one genuinely to inspect/try/play with the model locally/cloud itself, then you are prone to feed/train the model by using it.
AI, by refusing known information, is just becoming stupid and unpractical.
Why would I use Claude or ChatGPT when other companies (Meta, Alibaba, Forest Labs, Stability AI) are doing the same, but also giving you access to the base model for free?
Being able to run offline AI, or at least being able to host that by yourself gives you lot more freedom and transparency than a stupid ISO certification created by bureaucrats to comply with their own policies.