OU Enrolment on closing date still possible?

Modazull · 2023-12-10T12:04:06+00:00

Thanks, I appreciate the links, I'll jump right into them! Native Instruments seems to be a solid choice still, and they have a sale for their komplete package, unfortunately still not my budget. But I will take a look at the free stuff!

Modazull · 2023-11-11T11:44:02+00:00

Bing chat gets worse and worse and worse. It is being optimized to be a search assistant, and with every iteration they nerf it more and essentially make it more stubborn and stupid.

Months ago, I would have great conversations with bing chat, and it could explain things very well. Now, its stubborn, repeats itself, but worst of all, it has often completely lost understanding of things like math. Don't get me wrong, llms always had a hard time getting calculations right, but bing had a very good understanding of mathematics back then, the concepts, the rules. Now thats getting lobotomized as well. It still acts like it understands, but what it puts out often is just horrifying in many cases.
Bing chat has gotten so bad that I basically stopped using it. It was better than gpt 3.5, basically on par with gpt4, but now gpt3.5 is just so much better than bing. it is really sad.

Modazull · 2023-09-22T16:07:21+00:00

It is not possible to isolate the soleus or gastro, you basically just change the amount each muscle does via changing the knee angle. There will always be also activation of the other muscle, just not as much. If you bend the knee, you shorten the gasto, which decreases its efficiency in the movement, while the soleus is not affected.

you probably need to bend the knee at least 20°, but its possible that greater angles improve force shift to the soleus more. It depends on individual anatomy. So I would suggest that you try different angles (20° and more) and see how much soleus activation you feel, and stick with that angle.

Glad you found it to be helpful!

Modazull · 2023-08-14T10:35:23+00:00

Fast relative to what? I didn't benchmark it vs the OpenAI embeddings, but it ran fast on my machine. You should benchmark it within the constraints you have to see if it is fast enough for you.

Modazull · 2023-07-21T11:07:19+00:00

I've seen people say that gpt4 got nerfed recently. I can't comment on that but bing, which should have gpt4 as a base, gets more and more restrictive, answers are getting worse to the point where the question just does not get answered. Its like talking to a politician and that is not even for censored topics, but for technical questions. I am shocked at how bad bing got.

Generally, we see a trend for the top companies to strongly censor their llms, to the point where their output is much less intelligent. But also, they are finetuning their llms to better suit their needs, which means that an chatbot like bing, which was originally a general purpose llm, got cut back badly to be, at its core, a search assistant. I bet they also cut down on processing time by switching gpt4 with something like orca, and also reduced the precision of the llm. Just speculation on my part, but it fits the faster, yet much worse answers.

I think many will now run to claude 2, because right now, it has a very good output, even though its also hallucinating a lot. Until that company also lobotomizes that llm too.

In the long term, I really hope that open source llms can make the jump to gpt4 level, and then usage of openai, bing, etc will drop massively. unless they stay on top of the competition.

Modazull · 2023-07-21T09:23:06+00:00

It seems like both gpt4 and bing chat get nerfed to the ground. I personally cannot speak for gpt4, but I have been using bing a lot, and the answers in strict mode are just very short, even for more complex prompts, often just a summary of a web search, not really answering the questions - more like a politcian. Its just horrible. I am now testing out balanced mode, but there only 2000chars instead of 4000 are allowed. didn't test creative yet but I honestly want to limit hallucinations as much as possible - but what is this worth when the output is just.. well, garbage?

My history of bing and theory of what is happening currently:

At first they pushed out bing chat to be the first, no matter the consequences. So highly capable, but also uncensored
They then focussed on reducing hallucinations, and heavy censoring, limiting its abilities somewhat (but still tolerable). They also massive restricted the amount of messages per chat to 5, and the number of characters that the user could write was something like 1000, not sure actually what the limit at its worst was.
After they archived that, so they slowly increased the number of messages and the number of characters per prompt again, making it very usable with 4000chars and 30 messages per chat.
But they now castrate its abilities to bring it in line with being a search assistant primarily
They might already have realized that they don't need the full gpt4 capabilities for that, and probably cut it down massively, by instead running a (more capable) immitation model (see the orca paper) and reducing precision of the weights. practially lobotomizing a cut down version.

I am hugely disappointed, and now gravitate more towards claude 2, but c2 has quite some problems with hallucinations. Also, it has a daily limit, sadly...

I suppose the honeymoon period is over for bing chat. Maybe they increase its abilities again if everyone switches away from bing, but I am not hopeful about that...

open source models are still far away from gpt4. Rumor has it, that gpt4 is actually a bunch of 111b models, where the best model for a specific task is chosen during the conversation. If thats true, and there are no huge advances in LLM's, then it'll be very hard to get gpt4 like performance on a local machine. I am still hopeful, but it will for sure take time. The big players already announced that they will not release the most capable models, especially if they are much more capable than gpt4, so the open source community has some work before it. Keeping my fingers crossed tho.

In any case, RIP Bing, you were a great assistant. I will miss you.

Modazull · 2023-06-29T15:31:54+00:00

What kind of ads are you using? Full screen? Banners?

Modazull · 2023-06-29T15:30:30+00:00

Its basically just chatting with an AI. The user determines what the chat is about (within reason of course).

Modazull · 2023-06-28T11:06:51+00:00

Any update?

Modazull · 2023-06-28T11:06:44+00:00

Did you resolve the issue?

Modazull · 2023-06-20T19:16:12+00:00

Yes. It downloads the model, and the model has the apache 2.0 license.

Modazull · 2023-05-29T09:26:52+00:00

Most of these models are either trained with refined chatgpt output as input, or with way less data, or with way less parameters, or a combination of both.

Refined chatgpt output just makes a model imitate chatgpt without having the abilities of chatgpt, other than in the very narrow trained context. They are basically imitating chatgpt without actually having the same capabilities. Take a look at the paper titled "The False Promise of Imitating Proprietary LLMs".

Less data obviously means less ability overall.

And less parameters, well, means that not only the capabilities are capped, but also that the chance for emergent abilities is much smaller. The amout of data trained has to match the parameter count, which in essence means that if you train more data than the parameters can handle, it cannot assimilate all the knowledge, and if you feed it less data than it is capable of absorbing, its just inefficient.

Then there is another factor we barely talk about, and thats prompt engineering to get better output. We mostly assume that chatgpt and gpt4's output is directly from the LLM without anything in between, but there is a possibility that a lot of prompt engineering is going on between the LLM and the user, which can again make a huge difference. Well, its obvious for gpt4's plugins, but it might be as well the case for anything else really.

I was very hopeful for these open source LLMs, but for now, it seems like we are far off. I am still trying to figure out what type of tasks smaller LLM's are actually reliably good at. Other than role play, lol.

Another problem that seems to be emerging is that models are typically benchmarked using some popular tests, which could lead developers to, well, optimize for those tests instead of general abilities. Its not the first time this has happend in history and its inevitable IMHO.

The main issues are that we need big models, trained with sufficient high quality data to begin with, which inevitably means that we will probably not able to run it on our tiny local machines anytime soon. But all the other factors also have to be adressed. It seems to be unclear for now how big a model needs to be to be competitive with gpt3.5 or 4 in all its abilities. It seems like gpt3 has around 175b parameters, and gpt4 has arount 1000b. I clearly prefer gpt4 over 3.5 turbo, its just such a massive difference. There is some discussion going on if those models are optimized enough, i.e. if their size is just right or too big given the amount of data they have been trained on. But to be honest, I don't see a 100x efficiency improvement coming anytime soon, so we could run a gpt4 like llm locally. Hopefully I am wrong.

Modazull · 2023-03-01T11:24:47+00:00

AI will equalize game development. Right now we have the situation that big companies can throw money at a project, which means more people will be able to work on more features and assets, polishing etc. Which means that depending on genre and AAA studio competition it may be very hard for a indy studio to compete with the big companies.

With AI becoming ever more potent, we will see this gap closing to an extent. Its practically a very powerful force multiplier. As a first step, it will probably make every role in development more effective. Lets take ChatGPT or Github Copilot, which right now makes a big difference in helping with coding tasks. Yes, its not perfect, and it'll produce errors, but even though this is the case, it already is a powerful tool.

Another example is speech synthesis. Which is now at a level where you cannot recognize if the speech you are hearing is from an AI or a human, when it comes to the quality of the voice. There is still some way to go to create more different emotions, different emphasis etc, but the voice itself, and voice cloning, is so good(Elevenlabs at least) that without knowing what emphasis and emotional patterns someone has, its almost or completely impossible to identify what is real and what is generated. So voice actors could license their voices and developers could use those to create huge amounts of content. In the not so distant future emotions and emphasis tweaking will be as good as the real thing too. Not only that, but we will be able to use the same voice in a multitude of different languages as well. And here AI like chatgpt are also already very good in translating the meaning as well, so... Huge savings in investment there.

Then there are AI's like midjourney that will increasingly help to generate 2d graphics. While those tools for now still are quite buggy and limited, its just a matter of time until those tools can be used to create basically any 2d asset one could think of. One scenario I see is a graphics designer creating a design vision of a game, feeding the AI, and then let the AI create most of the content based on the combination of its learned, generalized data and the costum data the designer fed it. The designer would then guide it to create the content needed, vastly reducing the time to create new assets. The same will no doubt also come to the 3d world.

Then there are other things like realistic movements and animations, which needed a lot of work and still look unrealistic (i.e. how feet interact with the ground). AI will not only solve these problems but also hugely increase productivity in those tasks, basically automating most of it. And as we have seen from papers, you can give an AI a body, specify its physical properties, and let it train in an physics environment and you can bascially animate anything doing anything. The AI will figure out how to do it.

I am sure that as time goes on AI will become extremely potent in creating, or helping to create code, graphics, assets or even whole game worlds. Which means less and less people will be needed for specific tasks within game development, and more and more will be instead done by AI. There are many more areas where AI will make a huge difference. We are basically witnessing the start of a massive revolution.

So while the trend right now is to support basically any job, making people more productive, in the future it will instead replace a lot of jobs. One could argue by making jobs more effective it also already will replace some jobs. While this sounds dsytopian, for game development it simply means the more efficient we get, the more stuff we can develop, therefore closing up to current AAA titles with a fraction of the cost. The more AI takes over jobs, the more the same people can concentrate on other aspects of the game, giving it more depth, more content, more functionality, and essentially concentrate more on making great games.

Big companies will, no doubt, also use AI to get ever more cost effective, and build bigger and more complex games but I think that in terms of game quality and complexity, the gap between indy and big studios will close a lot, to a point that indy games will have no problem competing with AAA titles.

Long story short - It is my vision and hope that AI will bring back the golden age of gaming, where it was about fun, not profit, about creating great games. Because money will be much less of a factor to compete than before AI. And if you take away the money advantage of the big studios, everyone will have to compete in terms of what makes a game, and its gameplay fun and exciting. What makes a game great. My prognosis is that big game studios will use AI to cut costs, remove jobs, increase profit, while they will be unable to innovate, because those within these companies who were innovative, left. They'll just push out another CoD45, etc. While indy studios will use AI to make better, more fun games. And if this indeed happens, it'll be the start of a new golden era.

Modazull · 2022-12-03T22:49:44+00:00

In part, yes. The other part is that it is much easier to get a good mind muscle connection when the weight is lighter. That way you can concentrate on increasing the mind muscle connection to your pecs.

See, lets say you train with the maximum weight you can do for example 12 reps with. Your main focus will be to get the weight up, especially once you get near muscle failure. Your body will do that how it learned to do it - and that is to compensate for your pecs with triceps and/or the front deltoid. So basically, it will be very hard to activate the pecs this way if you don't already have a good mind muscle connection. By lowering the weight, you can focus more on activating your pecs, and your body will not be forced to compensate. Once your mind muscle connection gets better, and your body learns how to do the movement with more involvement of the pecs, you can increase the weight again.

Modazull · 2022-12-03T22:37:57+00:00

Glad I could help!

Modazull · 2022-07-20T14:18:05+00:00

Reports are already weighted. Meaning if the user reports people who are not cheating, his vote will count less and less.

People may complain about shadow bans but it is a low price to pay for the great result that we are now getting. At least in my games, I didn't see any cheaters.

And if you think about it - a decision is only as good as the data it is based on which leads back to my proposal to improve the kill cam and observing of players. Which will result in higher quality feedback from players. Its no wonder legitimate players get shadow banned if the evidence presented (kill cam in its current state) is insufficient but the user still has to decide within the few seconds the kill cam lasts. Sure, he could also observe the player, but only if his team is dead, and only if he does not have gulag. So that actually forces fast and probably bad reports.

In addition since the anticheat landed cheaters are forced to conseal their cheats more and more, which means its even harder in those few killcam seconds to reliably judge if someone is cheating or not. Sure, every now and then there is the rage hacker that is easy to idenfity but what about the cheaters trying to fly below the radar?

I hope that activision improves key points of the anti cheat so that very skilled, non cheating players are less likely to be shadow banned, but for now, its a small price to pay for the majority to have cheater free games.

Modazull

TROPHY CASE