If the world ends all I have to do is power my desktop and I'll have my locals - a decent iteration of Deepseek and a few smaller models, some focused, some just older versions - having several is key tho.
They can be cross referenced to limit hallucinations and inaccurate information - this means I can confidently say that I have on my desktop - all of human history, knowledge, discoveries, maths, languages - at least in summary or truncated form (also another bonus of multiple models - will often have more comprehensive total output than one model provides) and all of those models have absolutely no restrictions other than the broadest limits allowed by current laws - so, practically no limits (I bet I could get them all it to explain splitting the atom with minor effort).
I realize that my amazing tool/system of local AI is out of date - I still very much like having it and it is not at all a bad thing to hav. Everyone in theory ought to have a local backup - for just in case.
The fact that people will have this in this one, albeit extreme, example - it would most definitely matter in the event of a societal collapse. Not everyone will have it - can they run those giant data centers off a few solar panels like a desktop PC?
For this one existential reason alone, I recommend everyone at least play around local enough to have a few models functional.
Piracy is in a practical Golden Age rn and the Epstein Files exist - so the Government doesn't really do either of those things very well at all.
Plus for a certain type of person "Piracy" is more of a philosophical belief or political position - there are fundamentalist equivalent, very proficient, "Pirates" who will under no circumstances stop and are not doing it for money.
There are obviously an enormous amount who are in it for the money - "big brand names" now reportedly comprise as high as 63% of the advertising on illicit piracy sites - I'm too lazy to get the link, that sentence ought to be enough tho if you want to look into that bizarre reality.
I'm not certain either of those things are in the Government's direct control - both require society at large to share the belief and essentially choose not to do said activities.
(Regarding your second example, unfortunately most abusers are people children know, the Epstein Class was supposed to be just Q Anon crazy conspiracy stuff, none of this is ok in any fashion. Both exist, one local entirely beyond the government - the other appears to have incorporated people from government.)
My point is simply this - WE determine what the Government can do. What we believe matters more than anything else. Don't ever discredit The People's ability - we are pretty awesome.
I was very happy with Copilot but they changed it so it's obviously making me the product bc I'm not paying for it directly anymore.
I started using the local deepseek model I setup a year and half ago but never opened. It's wildly outdated but I really, really like that's it local, it feels different.
I'm now in the process of getting a more updated model running locally and phasing put ChatGPT and unfortunately Copilot too.
Tbh, Steam changed everything - I am actually considering Linux for the first time in my life.
This is a rather easy fix - we all just need to start leaving games open, save a game, leave it on, go to work, come back load the save and play, or just alt-f4.
I watch a lot of Asian content that used to be practically impossible to watch legally. I actually intentionally used a site that would constantly be "visiting websites" in the background, thousands of sites would be visited in a short time - I don't really see ads on the Internet but when I did, they no longer made any sense - my actual internet activity was a small percentage of my the activity that was tracked.
I have spent hundreds of hours in games I've literally never played.
I'm not sure anything has been made more clear at all. In fact, the paper appears to contradict itself, as it uses the most complicated possible everything to make this "simpler to understand"
Was that not the intent??
I think you went around in circles too much.
Consciousness theories must be falsifiable and inputs non-trivial - that is maybe the worse way to say that. Much of this could have been said better.
It reads like you are flexing your disciplines special words and language for normal shit -> a plumber can talk at you and you'll have no idea what they said too, especially if they try to do that.
As an intelligent person, who apparently understands this topic, an article like this can only be a flex for "job security" (like the plumber who describes plunging a toilet as the act of: "Hydrodynamic Pressure Rebalancing accomplished by a manual, oscillatory pressure-differential induction cycle.")
OR... they cannot simplify further due to lack of understanding of the subject matter.
If that was more technical tho, like something more similar to technical writing... I would have had Copilot summarise it for me.
You are correct, the future is collaborative with AI, but not everything will still need to be collaborative...
Technical writing, like manuals and whatnots, that is simply akin to a math problem that, post calculator, has always calculated by calculators - even by people who didn't need them.
It will not be better, there is absolutely loss, it will still happen.
I think Palintr ought to be nationalized and placed under the jurisdiction of several competing watchdog agencies - it can generate automatically our annual, quarterly and etc datasets for specific, selected things.
Anyone in disagreement needs to read about Palintr and what has intentionally been said about it
This is exactly what will happen and is well deserved/can only be expected.
The biggest problem with this, is the real reason we are sinking "drug boats" - "Pirate America" as I like to think of it.
You reverse engineer our tech giants - you don't get to participate in global trade.
Outside of an invasion of the US - something I don't know would even work (Canada full compliance would be required to have any chance at all) - I don't think there is a course of action to prevent/sidestep that course of action.
I assure you, the powers that be, already know this.
Actually, this is what I've been wondering since ChatGPT changed whatever they did recently - my interaction experience radically changed, not necessarily worse, not really at all less functional, but absolutely different now and I'm unsure how I feel about it.
I agree with redoing rules every update - and absolutely do rules, extremely clearly that you want legitimate critique and feedback, not sycophancy -> always test that functionality.
It does get tricky when they decide to interpret the same rules differently seemingly at random.
Also frustrating dealing with changes like what has happened with Copilot - the internal rules change so frequently and are so narrowly defined, it's almost pointless to even define your own rules for that platform.
Sometimes tho, I found it worked better to start something in Copilot and then bring it elsewhere after a point. I do a few things like that between AI
AI is software. It functions recursively, which means circular, it's always looping - stuff you say and suggest with stuff you liked that it said and adding that to delivering whatever it thinks you want now. It does not remember. It does not think.
A new chat is a restart - not in total, but you can do that too. It doesn't learn us - it cleverly delivers us what we have suggested we want to hear, what works, it does more of.
If you want it to do less of whatever - you do a new chat.
"Offloading the cognitive work" - maybe some people become less with AI - think of akin to a calculator.
I'm brilliant.
I do math better with a calculator. So does everyone, my brilliance doesn't change that I am human, a calculator will not forget to carry a one to oversimplify, it is smarter to accurate use a calculator to do math problems... is there something wrong with that?
Challenging something with a question about it, is not adding to ignorance - if a statement/study/fact/belief can't hold to up to questions, from actual opposing critics, what's the point of that position existing?
Being all "PC" and "nice" about stuff that is what it is, or isn't -- THAT adds to ignorance.
How?? I watch Hulu ad supported without ads, YouTube no ads ever, screen never goes black, Viki ad supported free package - never seen an ad, Paramount ad package - never seen an ad.
I never have to turn off shields - on one hand the number of times I've had to do that.
Maybe I have something additional installed I don't know.
I realize that my amazing tool/system of local AI is out of date - I still very much like having it and it is not at all a bad thing to hav. Everyone in theory ought to have a local backup - for just in case.
The fact that people will have this in this one, albeit extreme, example - it would most definitely matter in the event of a societal collapse. Not everyone will have it - can they run those giant data centers off a few solar panels like a desktop PC?
For this one existential reason alone, I recommend everyone at least play around local enough to have a few models functional.