> There is no IP theft because LLM outputs aren't protected, just egregious ToS violations
I meant original IP theft that occurs to train LLMs in the first place. But sure that implies that further LLMs based on that LLM are also tainted by that original IP theft.
They can license training data. They have trillions, look what they are dumping into it, you seriously think they can't afford to license data.
Obviously it would be easier if they do it from the start, but that was their trick, to do it while people don't notice and get big ASAP. Should they get away with it?
Also, it would solve their Chinese problem, because it would make them violate copyright too. Right now it's more like rules for thee not for me so it's hard to take seriously.
The issues with LLMs go beyond just IP theft. I would not say PRC making LLMs cheaper is the best outcome (though it is better than nothing). The best outcome would be to make the practice of training on our data without consent illegal, which would simultaneously slow down economic change and make it more organic as well as give PRC companies less capabilities to extract.
My theory is that YouTube blocks some accounts for publishing LLM-generated music, and people who wanted to earn ad money from it get burned and publish LLM-generated posts about it.
I would be on YouTube's side here, except it's possible that their motivation is simply to avoid poisoning their dataset while they train their models off creators videos. Also, the question is how they tell apart what's LLM-generated without false positives.
Maybe there were also artificial listens fraud (it's a problem with their competitor Spotify), but we'll never know because no one who was blocked would publish that honestly.
CEO of Roblox was once asked whether he would ever put prediction markets inside Roblox, he gave a straight face answer: https://youtu.be/XpIXRgMlPo4?t=2122
Not knowing what time it is for my Australian colleagues at all without checking my phone every single time is worse. Remembering N timezone offsets (remember DST and half-hour offsets, too) is worse. Doing UTC translation or adding "my time/your time" every time is worse.
If you talk mental overhead, current system is like 10x of that than global time.
We agreed to meet at "8pm their time" but unless I literally put it into my TZ-enabled calendar app every time the chance I mentally translate it to my TZ wrong is unacceptably high. With global time, meeting would be @123 and that's it. I can keep it in my head or write it down on paper, no confusion and full precision every time. I don't even need to know if it's day or night if it's a remote call with the other side of the Earth, maybe me or my colleague works late, who cares, but I know what time it is there at any moment.
> is not as high as people make it out to be.
It's not just timestamp translation and all the errors that come from that, it's all the rest of it, waste standardizing timezones and moving them around, having to convert time all the time, missed meetings, etc.
You have some fun ones. On the other side of the spectrum is PRC, where at the same hour of day it can be complete darkness on one side and almost technically noon on the other. It's super arbitrary with little rhyme or reason.
Things you will have in context when traveling: "it's going to be cold", "it's likely to rain", "it's going to be government conference so there will be extra delays with transport", "it's going to be %holiday% so everything's going to be closed all week", etc.
You're so used to it you don't even question that, and if you add to that "@x is when sunset usually happens"... somehow I think the world will not come crashing down.
> My point is either way you need to memorize some info in the first couple of interactions and it really doesn't make sense to go through all of this change to just memorize a different thing.
It's at least to make time management in systems much less error-prone and complex, among other things.
> if my flight to China lands at 9p local time, I immediately know that it's going to be night
What does that imply? If you mean "it's going to be dark", not really (you need to have more context to assume it's going to be dark at 9pm, there are places where in summer it's still very much light at 10pm). If you mean something like "buses are going to be running and McDonalds will be open", not really (you'll need to check the schedules anyway).
You would need to know that person's working hours, so I don't see how you are avoiding something.
Sure, if you talk to someone there for the first time, you would need to learn what time is generally day/night. However, you will know that 2-3 times in. Just like you would automatically know that now it's summer in Oz, or 3 hour short days near Arctic circle, if you talk to anyone from there even very occasionally.
Case in point, we have global calendar with no problems.
I don't think global time would be a problem like many people suggest. If you're in US and talk to somebody in Australia, you will quickly develop an intuition that time @X is night (or whatever it happens to be) over there, just like our other intuitions about how many things (weather, season, how long are sunsets, etc.) are different in different places.
Timezones are failing at all of their jobs. Getting time to correspond to sun position? It can be 7pm here and 7pm there but here it will be fully dark and there it will be still mid-evening. Knowing working hours of shops and government? Everything is all over the place. Everything is fluid and changes with seasons.
Plus, there is this unfair specialness that some countries are at UTC and others have offsets. With global time, everybody gets @0, just for different places it will be at a different sun position. (As long as we find a political way to pick something neutral, instead of saying "that's when the sun is highest in London".)
Finally, we don't have per-latitude calendar and things are working fine for us. It's February here and February in Argentina, and yet life doesn't stop even though it corresponds to winter here but to summer there.
The implication of "you have to have spent $1000 in tokens per engineer, or you have failed" is that you must fire any engineer who works fine by themselves or with other people and who doesn't require LLM crutch (at least if you don't want to be "failed" according to some random guy's opinion).
Getting rid of such naysayers is important for the industry.
> /issue you know that paint bucket in google docs i want that for tldraw so that I can copy styles from one shape and paste it to another, if those styles exist in the other shape. i want to like slurp up the styles
What kind of context may be there?
Also, the entire repository and issue tracker is context. Over time it gets only more complete.
If you don't have time, just write the damn issue as you normally would. I don't quite understand why one would waste so much resources and compute to expand some lazily conceived half-sentence into 10 paragraphs, as if it scores them some points.
If you don't have time to write an issue yourself or carefully proofread whatever LLM makes up for you, whom are you trying to fool by making it look pretty? At least if it is visibly lazy anyone knows to treat it with appropriate grain of salt.
Even if you are one of those who likes to code by having to correct LLMs all the time, surely you understand if your LLM can make candy out of poo when you post an issue then it can do the exact same thing when it processes the issue and makes a PR. Likely next month it will do a better job at parsing your quick writing, and having it immediately "upscaled" would only hinder future performance.