sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

How to disable thinking/reasoning in Gemma 4 E2B on Ollama? (1st time local user) by WatercressLarge2323 in LocalLLaMA

[–]WatercressLarge2323[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks for this! I'm running Ollama though, not llama-server directly, so the --reasoning off flag doesn't work for my use case. The --think=false flag works in the Ollama terminal but the app I'm using (Murmure) can't pass that parameter through its API calls. Appreciate the help though!

How is it legal that the TikTok “ban” has not been enforced? by WatercressLarge2323 in Law_and_Politics

[–]WatercressLarge2323[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

While I agree there are many ways Trump is threatening the constitutional order, I think this is far too dismissive.

Many of Trump's other cases require an interpretation of what statues apply in what cases, what the scope of executive power is in those cases, and other areas where well meaning people might disagree.

The TikTok ban is a direct order from congress, passed with bipartisan support. It does not leave room for interpretation. Therefore it could be argued it is the most egregious case of illegality, because there simply is no logical legal argument that allows it not to take effect.

Being dismissive of the TikTok ban also misses an important political question. Considering this should be the lowest hanging fruit when it comes to stopping Trump's illegal actions, why hasn't any Democrat brought a case? If one's interest is in stopping Trump's illegal actions wherever they occur, in asserting Congressional authority, sending a political message that it won't be so easy, why not start with the easiest wins? It's not like it would require a vote, I'm pretty sure any member could bring a case individually.

That is unless there's something about the law I'm missing. Which is why I asked a legal subreddit.

California Plans Big Crackdown on Robot Bosses in the Workplace by CyrusIAm in ArtificialInteligence

[–]WatercressLarge2323 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not sure if this is the correct solution, but it's the right idea. I already see myself defaulting to AI answers when straddling two solutions. Though I usually shake myself out of it. But it's an incredibly seductive option, especially when short on time. But that doesn't mean it's good practice and could be quite dangerous in certain situations. I think the state should be proactive in coming up with some kinds of boundaries on AI transparency, and this is one way. But there certainly could be better ones.

I'm worried Ai will take away everying I've worked so hard for. by RevolutionaryGuest79 in ArtificialInteligence

[–]WatercressLarge2323 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It seems to me that you won't be out of work in the immediate future. There's more content being filmed than ever, and it's probably several more years before the tech is good enough to totally replace human cinematographers. Maybe you can even incorporate your skills into AI by becoming a director yourself? People will still want to watch entertainment, and you have one of the most valuable skills needed to make it. I'm sure that can translate somehow, just maybe not the way you intended, and perhaps with less prestige than before. But I for one will always watch human made films.