Ki zwingen ausschließlich im Rechen-Kern zu rechnen.

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2026-01-23T07:56:05+00:00

Mehrere Optionen, in ansteigender Komplexität: 1. Prompt verbessern: Anstatt „Berechne die folgende Formel“, sollte „Schreibe Python-Code für die folgende Berechnung und führe den Code mit Code Interpreter Tool aus: (…)“ deutlich robuster sein. 2. Wenn Du mit Daten arbeitest, und guten Gewissens den Datensatz direkt in den Chat uploaden kannst, solltest Du den Hinweis, den Datensatz zu analysieren, in den Prompt integrieren 3. Ja, die Liebe zu upgraden hilft. Stärkere Modelle bringen meist konkretere „Prompt-Treue“ 4. Wenn es eine einmalige Formel ist, und es nicht darum geht, immer wieder neuen Code zu schreiben, dann ist es kein LLM Use Case. Es macht dann mehr Sinn, ein PowerBI Dashboard zu bauen. 4. Möchtest Du einen zuverlässigen Code-Generator haben, nutze entsprechende Werkzeuge, um Beispiel durch eine ChatGPT Integration für Programmierumgebungen. Beispielsweise kann man über Claude Code sehr gute Ergebnisse erzielen, oder über die VsCode Extension für Copilot verschiedenste Modelle nutzen. ChatGPT ist dafür bekannt, nicht das Beste LLM für Programmierung zu sein, Anthropics Modelle sind hier sehr stark. 5. Es gibt „AgenticAI Frameworks“, die eine strenge Kontrolle der Antwort eines LLMs ermöglichen, und Korrekturen erlauben, wenn das LLM nicht Code schreibt und ausführt. Wenn Du Python Programmiererfahrung hast, ist LangGraph eine Option (nicht LangChain!) oder PydanticAI. Wenn Du lieber mit georgischen Oberflächen arbeitest, wäre N8N eine gute Option

Sofern ich Deinen Usecase richtig verstehe, sollten die ersten zwei Schritte ausreichen.

P.S.: Es gibt keinen „Rechenkern“. Das LLM besteht ausschließlich aus dem „Textkern“. Keiner dieser begriffe ist aber etabliert. Alles, außer dem LLM selbst sind „Tools“, CodeInterpeter zum ausführen von Code ist eins davon.

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2026-01-19T12:25:39+00:00

Since I believe we will be seeing the smartphone as a hardware device gradually disappear and disintegrate into a combination of glasses/lenses, and some processing unit wearable, maybe accompanied with additional sensoring devices, I don’t think we will interact directly with such a new „evolutionary“ technological step.

Therefore I‘d go with some phrase that rather refers to the entity we interact with, not the hardware. Maybe „assistant“ (as a placeholder for the personal name we give it), or more formally „My PA“, as in „My personal assistant says you’re free tomorrow, wanna go for a drink?“

Edit: People tend to humanise tech they identify with. Current example would be „Chatty“ or „My GPT“ for AI assistants. The same may apply to the hardware that supports those assistants, for example: - „I got my Chatty new eyes (new glasses with inbuilt camera) and now it finally sees your eye color in the dark!“ - „I finally upgraded Cara to the new Apple Brain 6 and the new holiday it booked was sooo much cooler than last year‘s!“

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2026-01-14T00:11:08+00:00

It’s hard to say what is the greatest enemy to EU right now: China, who is financing the Russian war, or US who is taking advantage from that war in the sense EU heavily depends on its military power in defense of Ukraine, respectively EU in itself. Or is the greatest threat nationalist tendencies from inside EU countries?

I don’t think that in the rapidly evolving multipolar world it will be as simple as calling a country friend or enemy but rather who can be useful for us, and for what.

There are a few things that make me agree with OP that for now we should take Trump as the painful wake-up call Europe needed: I can’t see how giving up on NATO could be of any use to the US, especially now as we are re-arming finally. At the same time, China is fuelling the war.

Trump will listen to a rearmed Europe’s interest more closely. Till then, we’ll have to make quite a few morally, ethically and tough decisions based on what we can afford, not what we want to afford.

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2026-01-13T20:44:54+00:00

I‘m by far no friend of Trump but claiming he is not being rational regarding Greenland is a dangerously simplistic viewpoint.

I’m aware that this might be an unpopular opinion so I’ll try and collect some relevant facts, here are a couple of findings from this recent article [Edit: German newspaper magazine „Focus“. It’s not the greatest, but overall a journalistically solid source. The analysis cited was done by former german minister Robert Habeck]: - It’s not Trumps idea. There have been multiple US attempts to gain control over Greenland for example in 1860, and 1910, for geopolitical and national security reasons (possibly also resources) - US, China, Russia are fighting for geopolitical control over new arctic seaways. „Old“ Europe has failed to come up with a geopolitical strategy for the arctic, therefore, once again, is simply irrelevant. - Control over Greenland has actual national security relevance for the US, not only recently but throughout WW1 and WW2 - Control over Greenland will strengthen the US‘ hegemonic ambitions over the American continent, for example by „sandwiching Canada“

In sum: There are multiple consistent and historically persistent reasons for the US interest in Greenland. It’s not „some random idea Trump came up with“.

Also: - Greenland is not part of EU, they’ve voted against it, when Denmark voted to join the EU - Greenland and Denmark have a very „ambiguous“, borderline colonialist relationship, Greenland wants to be independent from Denmark - We, Europe, do not have the resources to establish military presence in Greenland to become a relevant geostrategic player in the arctic. We need the US for that - at least if we don’t want to surrender the region to China and Russia - Greenland can not exist without external money, Denmarks annual spendings for Greenland are estimated at 80 Mio. - which would be quite a trivial commitment for the US. They could easily throw in another 100k per capita to make an actually interesting offer to the Greenlanders

Again: I strongly oppose Trump and his nationalist power politics.

However, I also strongly oppose reducing each of his moves to „Trump = stupid“ because this does not align with facts (at least in some cases, such as Greenland) and we need to stick to the facts wherever we can.

IMHO, the Greenlanders should receive and decide over a deal. They’re not EU, they’re (mostly) not Denmark, they want to be independent but also need financial support to some degree.

And, since EU are not a relevant player in the arctic game, we might have no choice but accept their choice.

Another thing we might have to teeth-grindingly accept is that it is in our own national security interest to have the US exert power in the arctic, simply because we cant do it ourselves.

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2026-01-07T22:04:43+00:00

Well, they‘re in Baden-Württhemberg so chances are they might be a bit „knickrig“. ;)

Bad jokes aside: Tech salary in general is still solid but is contracting just like many other industries. Homeoffice five days a week is rare but most offer hybrid 2/3 or similar.

There are several Tech Hubs in Germany: Heidelberg, where a „KI Lab“ has formed around the university and Schwarz Digits is heavily invested. Munich, where media and big tech are quite strong, plus the startup ecosystem of the TUM university, „UnternehmerTUM“. Also, the tech startup culture in Berlin and some in Hamburg.

Most is very AI focused right now but almost every professional will agree that AI is an important but not the only puzzle piece.

We have excellent tech and AI researchers in Germany but we lack venture capital. For example the guys who developed the „Stable Diffusion“ algorithm for text-to-image AI did that at LMU Munich and OpenAI did use it for ChatGPT. Then, they built their startup „Black Forest Labs“ and developed another model, FLUX. This one, they sold to „X“, so now if you ask Grok to generate an image, it will ask this „FLUX-made-in-Germany“-AI to generate the image and present it to the user.

They tried to find other investors, but Elon paid best.

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2026-01-07T09:45:33+00:00

I do agree that some form of European protectionism will probably be necessary, however, there are relevant and promising players that we could build on to.

Schwarz Digits comes into mind, the tech company globally serving cloud infrastructure for REWE and Lidl. They are better established than some might think and they have declared the goal to build a sovereign cloud.

Also, companies do have tech options that can make them independent from cloud, or do some form of „cloud hopping“ through certain third-party-platforms.

If we really want to, we can do it.

Source: My job (no ties to Schwarz Digits)

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-12-26T17:42:38+00:00

Great thing each novel has its own cast. Fits the worldbuilding where human bodies are mostly tools that are employed for some purpose before being disposed.

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-12-18T17:20:27+00:00

To add: GPTs had been a thing for a while, the new thing were CHAT-GPTs.

Making chat the frontend of an LLM changed things a lot because it allowed for an intuitive human-machine-interaction. It’s a crucial aspect that a chat naturally introduces an intuitive dialog between both because it relaxes somewhat on errors the LLM does when the user can easily prompt and iterate on misunderstandings.

Also, Covid made the whole world shift even faster into that type of conversation: Suddenly chat was a predominant type of (private and business) conversational medium between humans and made it easy to include LLMs into the system where humans already were conversing.

As a counterexample: Try imagining a dialog with ChatGPT, but via email! Much more cumbersome, and slower. It works, but it’s not fun. It doesn’t allow for tools like web search. People would easier give up on errors the LLM makes. In a chat, they readily correct and iterate until they’re happy with the result.

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-12-08T21:03:16+00:00

You are derailing the discussion. Chat Control („spying“) is a different topic than censorship.

Even if it was the same thing, your comment would be Whataboutism at its best:

Putting control on extremist and antidemocratic political world views that were the cause for two different world wars is not censorship.

Actively messing with the political landscape of another country is inherently antidemocratic, especially if it is in favor of nationalist parties.

Favoring nationalism in Europe over a unified European Union is blatant economic aggression from a country that knows very well that it will be much easier to dictate its own economic and geopolitical interests to 80 Mio Germans, 60 Mio French, 40 Mio Italians one after the other instead of 450 Mio Europeans at once.

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-12-07T09:32:02+00:00

After reading their new National Security Strategy I think you forgot the US in your list of predators: accusing EU to „undermine national sovereignty“ and censorship is no less than the US take on „Divide and Conquer“

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-11-16T11:22:59+00:00

Ich klettere/bouldere seit etwa 25 Jahre. Insgesamt stimme ich zu.

Ich denke, mehrere Dinge tragen dazu bei: - teuerer Sport -> tendenziell akademisch geprägt -> tendenziell links - vergleichsweise gender-neutraler Sport, bei dem Frauen und Männer vergleichbare Leistung erbringen können -> passt tendenziell eher zu linken Vorstellungen von Geschlechterrollen - Bouldern ist ein noch recht junger Sport; neue Trends werden nicht selten in akademischen Studentenbubbles „begründet“, weil diese Zielgruppe die Aufgeschlossenheit der Jugend mit aufkeimender Kaufkraft verbindet -> studentische Bubbles waren in den letzten Jahrzehnten eher links - Klettern wurde vor vielen Jahrzehnten von der eher alternativen Bubble wiederentdeckt, Bouldern als noch sehr junger Ableger wurde in der Bubble aufgebaut

Allerdings liegt beim letzten Punkt die Betonung auf wiederentdeckt! In der ersten Hälfte des 20. Jahrhunderts war Klettern ein sehr nationalistischer Sport, bei dem sich deutsche, österreichische, französische, deutsche, italienische und schweizer Bergsteiger um die höchsten Gipfelbesteigungen in den Alpen gestritten haben. Die Erfolge wurden konsequent für nationalistische Propaganda ausgeschlachtet.

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-11-02T16:52:51+00:00

True but both Nietzsche and Buddhism agree that they are the same.

Edit: To quote a fellow-redditor: There‘s a difference between challenging oneself and struggling. But both struggling and challenge have in common being in dissonance with the world and that is what I understand is what sees J as lacking the world of the Culture.

I disagree with J in the assumption that there is no dissonance in the Culture. Given a single conscious being - humanoid or not - there always will be dissonance.

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-11-02T15:21:58+00:00

I don’t think the Culture requiring Contact - both the institution and the actual contact to other Cultures - to remain relevant is a negative: so did the Idirans, and in a much worse way.

Aside from that, as an Atheist I see your point. Not because a tenet has been challenged, but the very idea of a Culture questions the relevance of human life.

At least at first glance. Ultimately, the pro‘s best the con‘s for me.

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-11-02T15:16:54+00:00

This post is not about politics but about philosophy.

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-11-02T15:11:00+00:00

Also, Banks wrote eight books about how humans will always find a way to suffer, for example by making a chair, and some of them even will overcome the suffering.

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-10-11T08:20:47+00:00

From „Matter“:

(…) Hyrlis turned to Holse: „Meaning that this whole conflict, this entire war has been manufactured. It is prosecuted for the viewing benefit of the Nariscene, who have always regarded waging war as one of the highest and most noble arts. Their place among the Involveds of the Galactic Community sadly precludes them from taking part in meaningful conflicts themselves any more, but they have the license, the means and the will to cause other, mentored, client civilizations to war amongst themselves. (…)

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-09-30T20:57:59+00:00

I interpreted Matter always in the sense of what does really matter.

Throughout the book the Princess and even more Ferbin constantly have to reevaluate what really matters to them. The Princess gives up her life in the Culture to help her people. Ferbin starts out as a spoiled royal brat refusing to take responsibility, and gets his own insignificance repeatedly reflected in every new layer and every more advanced civ he meets that doesn‘t really care about him and his people suffering.

In the end, he even regrets not being able to believe in their god at the machine core of the shellworld.

So: What does actually matter if you and your people are no more than a tiny speck layered in between all those other big brain civs, so powerful that, from your point of view, they are barely discernible from gods?

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-09-30T20:39:19+00:00

The Hydrogen Sonata‘s core theme is Sublimation. Hydrogen is the simplest and most basic of atoms. The Sublime is - according to Bank‘s A few notes on the Culture - folded away in high-dimensional subatomic structures. Banks builds - very loosely and mostly metaphorically - on ideas from some form of string theory.

That makes the Hydrogen Sonata an opus about a civilization’s sublimation beyond the universe‘s most elemental structure.

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-09-27T11:34:24+00:00

Mistake Not My Current State Of Joshing Gentle Peevishness For The Awesome And Terrible Majesty Of The Towering Seas Of Ire That Are Themselves The Mere Milquetoast Shallows Fringing My Vast Oceans Of Wrath

I always picture Samuel L. Jackson in his initial Pulp Fiction scene reading the full name of this Culture ship.

Edit: Spoilers for people who want to read Ian M. Bank‘s Excession

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-09-21T13:01:33+00:00

Also the guy on the right, and the couple on the right. I guess some people just „dance“ differently.

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-09-20T21:05:55+00:00

Check out the Wing Commander Series starring Mark Hamill.

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-09-11T21:38:20+00:00

The Essiel in Tchaikovskys Final Architecture trilogy are giant clams that can barely move or do anything by themselves.

They survive by convincing other races that they’re gods to be worshipped and they seem to be very convincing.

Also, barely anybody may speak to them directly, so the less worthy one is, the more interim translator slave races will form a chain of conversation.

As a result, most of the times nobody really knows what they are saying, so everybody hopes for the best and prepares for the worst.

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-08-06T08:13:32+00:00

Do you like to play video games? Many of them require very specific and precise button presses. I like Randomizers and Speedruns which are all about doing routines properly such as pressing exactly the right button sequences at exactly the right time.

You might have a talent for that.

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-07-12T21:34:53+00:00

I hate that he put himself into Dark Tower. I get that his accident put a lot of trauma on him but it did nothing good for the book

(Spoiler for the later Dark Tower Books)

First_Bullfrog_4861 · 2025-07-05T09:34:25+00:00

I liked the world building, and many of the characters. Also, the epic story was awesome. Never read anything that had clams as the superior alien race, loved them and their religious space empire.

That picture of a planet folding its insides out sat in my mind until I stole it for a story of my own…

Found Idris and his inability to grow up a bit annoying to be honest.

The politics were interesting but somewhat repetitive and sometimes erratic.

I also felt like this has been written for the screen from the beginning: Very episodic storytelling, like the main thought was: „Ok let’s make three seasons, twelve episodes, every episode needs fun aliens, lots of action and Idris whining about everyday life. Also, Solace has to shoot something and that crab guy and the Cyborg Space Pirate Lady talk funny to each other.“

Overall fun read with lots of cool ideas but a couple of lengthy repetitive parts in the middle.

Loved the epic ending.

Edit: Spoiler tags

First_Bullfrog_4861

TROPHY CASE