Balder

No paywalled link: https://archive.is/1QR8H

It’s more accurate to say they might be, but not necessarily. China is very aware of the benefits of keeping ahead technologically.

Well yeah, but the article is about a paper that’s showing a strategy to improve planning capabilities in comparison to using LLMs as they are currently. It’s just research, they’re not saying to use that in production now, and I’d say it isn’t something the researchers are even worried about for this particular artifact.

I think the problem is there’s just too much work that needs to be put in these things and people don’t really think about it. Android has at this point almost 2 decades of refining the experience for phones, so it’s a good starting point.

But the most important thing I guess is software. People often neglect how much time and effort is put to refine software to the point it becomes polished and bug free. Android has a mature stack to build apps that is very difficult to replicate.

But to be more clear I didn’t mean just getting a degoogled Android and settle with it. Android could also evolve in other ways that aren’t in Google’s interest, such as allowing you to have a sort of Dex that’s actually a Linux Desktop Environment.

It’s much less effort to have something based on Android open source project though.

At this point, I think it’s required to have a sort of alternate identity online and keeping anything private, photos of yourself and other information just offline. Except for government stuff, which requires your real identity.

Brace yourselves, because this is only going to get worse with the current “vibe coding” trend.

I’m starting to think my parents who are already reaching their 70s are lucky people.

Only those that criticize the government, somehow. “Oops, because of some complicated algorithm, it only affected people who posted the word ‘orange’ on social media recently.”

Yeah the text makes many freestyle assumptions, although the overall sentiment is correct that these big companies and especially egocentric billionaires do stuff to trigger others simply for power display. I believe the text linked about it being a distraction for the new round of funding is the real reason.

I mean, you can argue that if you ask the LLM something multiple times and it gives that answer the majority of those times, it is being trained to make that association.

But a lot of these “Wow! The AI wrote this” might just as well be some random thing that came from it out of chance.

Not only that, the Android Police article mentions they had a lot of trouble merging the internal branches and the public branches, so I’m guessing as time went on they’ve diverged more and more.

There are apps which display the user karma though.

Not sure why this specific thing is worthy of an article. Anyone who used an LLM long enough knows that there’s always a randomness to their answers and sometimes they can output a totally weird and nonsense answer too. Just start a new chat and ask it again, it’ll give a different answer.

This is actually one way to know whether it’s “hallucinating” something, if it answers the same thing consistently many times in different chats, it’s likely not making it up.

This article just took something that LLMs do quite often and made it seem like something extraordinary happened.

It’s been a long time I use DuckDuckGo as my default search engine for basic stuff (which let’s be honest, more than 80% is just a simple query to find a certain area of some website, like “Firefox download Windows”, “Discord site status”, “Microsoft office pricing” etc.). If I want to search something more related to my own language or recent events in my county, Google is a must, but that’s like 10% of all my search engine usage. I don’t really need Google to know about the other 90%.

“Italian organized crime groups receipts have been estimated to reach 7–9% of Italy’s GDP.”

But I guess pirating books is a more pressing problem.

Even North Korea can’t stop pirating completely.

This could be solved in other ways. For example, the software can simply track what % of the books are actually read without this extra step of borrowing and returning. Just like when you listen to music on streaming services.

Imagine if you had to select the specific album in a streaming service and choose to borrow it for x days, having to “return” it and borrow again if you wanted to keep listening, and being limited to 4 albums at a time.

Like… if the book is digital, why do you have to borrow and return? This makes no sense. They want to replicate a bad experience that doesn’t need to exist, what’s the point of that?

At the same time, they unfortunately can’t imagine things being better. That’s why societies differ a lot between cultures in different parts of the world.