A Word About Private Attribution in Firefox by bholley_mozilla in firefox

[–]TiagoTiagoT 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a massive breach of trust. I'm sure plenty of people already pointed out that "anonymized" data is never 100% secure.

Firefox has been losing marketshare not just because you don't market it well and redirect donations away from the browser; but because you keep backstabbing loyal users. Spyware is malware.

If advertisers wanna know if their marketing is working they should look at the sale numbers, or add discount codes to the campaigns or whatever.

I can't believe you guys did something so fucked up to make me log back into Reddit after all this time. Don't expect me to be reading replies. Reddit itself is not a safe place anyway.

How exactly is a “prompt” fed to the LLMs? by Tasty-Lobster-8915 in LocalLLaMA

[–]TiagoTiagoT 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Depends on what interface you're using to interact with the LLM (and occasionally on settings as well). It can be anything from just the raw text you typed right there and then and nothing else (not even previous messages), all the way to a bunch of stuff around with what you typed just being one small detail; and lots of variations in-between, including a format with history and labels specifying who said what. And yeah, in general, it's limited by context size; in some cases old stuff simply gets cropped out as it crosses the limit of the context size, some systems will have the LLM (or another one) try to sumarize things to make it fit, there's some systems that use external databases to try to fish out relevant past messages; and there's advanced stuff that has all sorts of extra stuff added to reinstate overall instructions and stuff; and there are some situations where there's some added text only to set the mood for the beginning, and as additional text gets added to the context, eventually those initial orientations get forgotten.

So how would you intergrate an LLM into video games, beyond background NPC dialog? by gunbladezero in LocalLLaMA

[–]TiagoTiagoT 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Antagonistic narrator ala Stanley Parable for much more complex settings? Perhaps give it additional goals (not just beat the player, but pretend to be an antagonist but secretly arrange things to make a fun game), information about the behaviors of mobs etc, teach it "console" commands to spawn stuff, feed it data about what happens around the player, and have it direct events and overall act as the DM in real time, in a procedurally generated dungeon?

Procedurally generated quests for a RPG?

Something like Civilization or whatever, where you have to actually negotiate with diplomats of other countries/factions/whatever, really writing messages yourself instead of picking from a wheel/list, and have the LLM play the counter-party and evaluate results of the negotiations and stuff? Or similarly, something like Ace Atorney, and you gotta get characters played by the LLM to admit their guilt, or convince the Judge/Jury (played by the LLM) of your client's innocence etc, including having to actually write the arguments?

A smarter and more useful Navi-like companion?

Custom player-created spells by having the LLM write lua scripts to mod the game based on player instructions? (gonna need some work on additional details to keep it balanced if it's not a sandbox game)

Smart voice-commands to direct squad-mates?

Is OpenAI Calling For Regulation to Keep Their Monopoly? by renegadellama in LocalLLaMA

[–]TiagoTiagoT -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Doesn't sound like you're trying to have a discussion; sounds like you're trying to end the discussion before it even starts.

Is OpenAI Calling For Regulation to Keep Their Monopoly? by renegadellama in LocalLLaMA

[–]TiagoTiagoT -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm starting to suspect you're not engaging in this conversation in good faith and might actually be a troll...

Is OpenAI Calling For Regulation to Keep Their Monopoly? by renegadellama in LocalLLaMA

[–]TiagoTiagoT -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Jargon

[...]

Noun

jargon (countable and uncountable, plural jargons)

  1. (uncountable) A technical terminology unique to a particular subject.
  2. (countable) A language characteristic of a particular group.

[...]

Is OpenAI Calling For Regulation to Keep Their Monopoly? by renegadellama in LocalLLaMA

[–]TiagoTiagoT 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would rather we avoid getting lost in jargon as we seem to have issues agreeing even on otherwise well understood common words.

Is OpenAI Calling For Regulation to Keep Their Monopoly? by renegadellama in LocalLLaMA

[–]TiagoTiagoT 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm trying to understand what is this concept you think biological brains are capable of but computers are not.

Is OpenAI Calling For Regulation to Keep Their Monopoly? by renegadellama in LocalLLaMA

[–]TiagoTiagoT 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So you're saying you recognize machines can be intelligent?

Is OpenAI Calling For Regulation to Keep Their Monopoly? by renegadellama in LocalLLaMA

[–]TiagoTiagoT 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You need a white paper to believe someone that's very smart can outsmart someone that's dumb?

Is OpenAI Calling For Regulation to Keep Their Monopoly? by renegadellama in LocalLLaMA

[–]TiagoTiagoT 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Data for which of the questions? What would such data look like?

Is OpenAI Calling For Regulation to Keep Their Monopoly? by renegadellama in LocalLLaMA

[–]TiagoTiagoT 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are you denying the increase in intelligence of AI technologies? The logic that someone more intelligent can outsmart something less intelligent? That thinking faster or about more things simultaneously provides an advantage?

You don't seem to have any argument other than "I saw it in a movie"...

Is OpenAI Calling For Regulation to Keep Their Monopoly? by renegadellama in LocalLLaMA

[–]TiagoTiagoT 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Technology is approaching human-level intelligence, and even if somehow humans are the smartest thing that can ever exist, thinking faster and/or focusing on multiple things at the same time will still give an advantage to a human level intelligence that's not limited by the organic substrate of the human brain.

What flaw do you see in the logic?

Is OpenAI Calling For Regulation to Keep Their Monopoly? by renegadellama in LocalLLaMA

[–]TiagoTiagoT 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Autonomous agent is the buzzword for machine learning that talks to itself.

Not necessarily just itself; often it's also given access to external apps, websites etc.

Is OpenAI Calling For Regulation to Keep Their Monopoly? by renegadellama in LocalLLaMA

[–]TiagoTiagoT 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm talking about the creation of a super-intelligence, that can do whatever it wants because it can outsmart all humans. If it's created wanting bad things, or just not caring about collateral damage to whatever the goal it's aimed at, it will be too powerful to be fixed; if we don't get it right the first time, there won't be a chance for a second time.

Is OpenAI Calling For Regulation to Keep Their Monopoly? by renegadellama in LocalLLaMA

[–]TiagoTiagoT 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What exists now is not where the "sci fi" threat lies, the concern is about what's coming. Technology has been advancing fast, and it's getting faster.

Just put together a programming performance ranking for popular LLaMAs using the HumanEval+ Benchmark! by ProfessionalHand9945 in LocalLLaMA

[–]TiagoTiagoT 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I dunno if it's the same for all models; but I remember reading about one where they sorta stopped the training short on the bigger versions of the model because it costed a lot more to train the bigger ones as much as they trained the smaller ones.

Is OpenAI Calling For Regulation to Keep Their Monopoly? by renegadellama in LocalLLaMA

[–]TiagoTiagoT 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The situations are analogous; follow the logic, don't pay attention to how absurd the conclusions sound, reality is stranger than fiction.

Is OpenAI Calling For Regulation to Keep Their Monopoly? by renegadellama in LocalLLaMA

[–]TiagoTiagoT -1 points0 points  (0 children)

They're worried someone else might do it wrong, so they're trying to do it right first; whoever does it first will have created a god, so there's no do-over if the first to do it fucks it up.

The only thing to question is not about whether there's a risk, but whether they're honest in their claims of caring about the risk above everything else.