ganymede

Glad to see everyone agrees this is

1. funny cos they're crying over stealing what they stole

2. acknowledges this means the weights are actually open sourced (which is how it fuckin should be)

also discussion i've seen elsewhere:

3. when considering the energy footprint of chatgpt, also consider the energy footprint of running the internet for 30 years to accumulate all that data they stole. therefore the most ecological option is to extract the weights and then opensource it.

just want to add

4. if the accusations aren't true (still a possibility), oai is probably deliberately buying time/stock recovery by keeping this discussion in the news rather than everyone discussing how much they suck

5. if large entities are going to capture and then open source each others proprietary weights, that may actually be one of the best outcomes for global humanity amidst this "AI" craze

fpr MP games the server code ^1^ should be released to the community when finally taking the servers offline

^1^ (or at least binaries with minimum standards for support/documentation)

fuck me lemmy is turning into an absolute reddit-esque cesspool shithole.

i do not understand why people are in here simping for cloudflare (presumably unpaid) do they have money in cloudflare? clearly they don't have a fucking clue whats really going on in the world, but what makes them think they need to actively enforce (ie. downvote people) for pointing out issues with cloudflare??

this is beyond weird.

obviously this is all just my opinion, but it seems evident to me:

the oligarchs.

they've realised their best shot at power is by dividing us cos there's no way this shit would fly otherwise. that's why they've been flooding us with every single possible topic of division, black vs white, straight vs lgbqt, even lgb vs trans (!!!), young vs old, boomers vs millenials. city vs rural.

all of that said, if you just don't think you can stomach the wedding event then you're nta imo.

the current pantomime is clearly designed to divide us and it's working quite well.

you wouldn't be an arsehole, but divide and conquer is exactly what they want

I wonder if the context of 'tech person' vs average person is what they meant?

A genx tech person in their field is going to be on avg further along than millenial in the same field - because they've literally been doing it longer, more experience, learnt more, exposed to more fundamentals.

imo the distinction is the average (non-tech) genx probably will have less tech exposure than avg millenial, millenials were coming up during the shift of the average person thinking "computers are for geeks" to "tech is cool".

disclaimer: generation names are kind of arbitrary divide and conquer bs anyway.

innovating or being less wasteful??

(·•᷄_•᷅ )

arguing to reduce the population so the privileged can have even more privilege?

( ˶ˆᗜˆ˵ )

Sorry for my poor phrasing, perhaps re-read my post? i'm entirely supporting your argument. Perhaps your main point aligns most with my #3? It could be argued they've already begun from a position of probable bad faith by taking this data from users in the first place.

TLDR edit: I'm supporting the above comment - ie. i do not support apple's actions in this case.

It's definitely good for people to learn a bit about homomorphic computing, and let's give some credit to apple for investing in this area of technology.

That said:

1. Encryption in the majority of cases doesn't actually buy absolute privacy or security, it buys time - see NIST's criteria of ≥30 years for AES. It will almost certainly be crackable either by weakening or other advances.. How many people are truly able to give genuine informed consent in that context?

2. Encrypting something doesn't always work out as planned, see example:

"DON'T WORRY BRO, ITS TOTALLY SAFE, IT'S ENCRYPTED!!"

Source

Yes Apple is surely capable enough to avoid simple, documented, mistakes such as above, but it's also quite likely some mistake will be made. And we note, apple are also extremely likely capable of engineering leaks and concealing it or making it appear accidental (or even if truly accidental, leveraging it later on).

Whether they'd take the risk, whether their (un)official internal policy would support or reject that is ofc for the realm of speculation.

That they'd have the technical capability to do so isn't at all unlikely. Same goes for a capable entity with access to apple infrastructure.

3. The fact they've chosen to act questionably regarding user's ability to meaningfully consent, or even consent at all(!), suggests there may be some issues with assuming good faith on their part.

can you please explain in a little more depth? are you saying pluton is basically dead in the water and is likely to disappear from implementations in silicon in the near future?