Rimworld’s DLCs are kinda assumed purchases for the modding scene, too. I feel like this drives a lot of their sales TBH.

Traning data is curated and continous.

In other words, one (for example, Musk) can finetune the big language model on a small pattern of data (for example, antisemetic content) to ‘steer’ the LLM’s outputs towards that.

You could bias it towards fluffy bunny discussions, then turn around and send it the other direction.

Each round of finetuning does “lobotomize” the model to some extent though, making it forget stuff, overuses common phrases, reducing its ability to generalize, ‘erasing’ careful anti-reptition tuning and stuff like that. In other words, if Elon is telling his engineers “I don’t like these responses. Make the AI less woke, right now,” he’s basically sabotaging their work. They’d have to start over with the pretrain and sprinkle that data into months(?) of retraining to keep it from dumbing down or going off the rails.

There are ways around this outlined in research papers (and some open source projects), but Big Tech is kinda dumb and ‘lazy’ since they’re so flush with cash, so they don’t use them. Shrug.

There is a nugget of ‘truth’ here:

https://csl.noaa.gov/news/2023/390_1107.html

I can’t find my good source on tis, but there are very real proposals to seed the arctic or antarctic with aerosols to stem a runaway greenhouse gas effect.

It’s horrific. It would basically rain down sulfiric acid onto the terrain; even worse than it sounds. But it would only cost billions, not trillions of other geoengineering schemes I’ve scene.

…And the worst part is it’s arctic/climate researchers proposing this. They intimately know exactly how awful it would be, which shows how desperate they are to even publish such a thing.

But I can totally understand how a layman (maybe vaguley familiar with chemtrail conspiracies) would come across this and be appalled, and how conservative influencers pounce on it cause they can’t help themselves.

Thanks to people like MTG, geoengineering efforts will never even be considered. :(

TL;DR Scientists really are proposing truly horrific geoengineering schemes “injecting chemicals into the atmosphere” out of airplanes. But it’s because of how desperate they are to head off something apocalyptic, and it’s not even close to being implemented. They’re just theories and plans.

Reads bit on dictator-propping via propaganda in Sudan.

Nods. Yep, that sounds like my government alright. And Big Tech. Cries inside.

Veers off to “Ukraine Proxy War” with no reference to ChatGPT as promised in the headline.

Sighs. Closes tab.

Well, exactly. Trump apparently has a line to Apple and could probably get Tim to take it down.

How does this make any sense?

Shouldn’t they be suing Apple to take it down if they don’t like it? I know they just want to weaken press, but it feels like an especially weak excuse.

…Well, the pro nuclear angle is a tiny silver lining?

I was testing heavily modded Minecraft, specifically Enigmatica, which chugs even on beefy PCs.

Out of curiosity, what mod are you running for shaders, specifically? That may have an effect.

Not in niche games. Rimworld and Stellaris (for instance) are dramatically faster on Windows, hence I keep a partition around. I’m talking 40%ish better simulation speeds vs Linux native (and still a hit with Proton, though much less).

Minecraft and Starsector, on the other hand, freaking love Linux. They’re dramatically faster.

These are kinda extreme scenarios, but the point is AAA benchmarks don’t necessarily apply to the spectrum of games across hardware, especially once you start looking at simulation heavy ones.

Yes, we know, you are preaching to the choir here, lemmy.ml.

But I’d rather we not back out of NATO, decouple trade and invade friendly neighbors all while the US continues to screw over far away countries first. At this point, backing out of NATO is not going to help our bad behavior.

After that, we can worry about not screwing with other countries so much, hopefully.

Good move TBH. Just like that, Trump likes NATO again.

Seriously though, has anyone had such an absolute grip on a US political party? Ever? George Washington had plenty of squabbling under him. Most dictators had more dissent.

Non-interventionism was an absolute core of MAGA; this would be like Hitler pronouncing “we love Jews!” and everyone lining up like ducks. And they are! /r/conservative is ecstatic…

What about the used market? The Nvidia 1080/1080 TI or AMD 6000/7000 series is not too bad.

It seemed like horrible value at the time, but in hindsight a 4090 was not the worst investment, hah.

One issue is everyone is supply constrained by TSMC. Even Arc Battlemage is OOS at MSRP.

I bet Intel is kicking themselves for using TSMC. It kinda made sense when they decided years ago, but holy heck, they’d be swimming in market share if they used their own fabs instead (and kept the bigger die).

I feel like another is… marketing?

Like, many buyers just impulse buy, or go with what some shill recommended in a feed. Doesn’t matter how competitive anything is anymore.

A condom is not going to get elected.

To be fair, Newsom is sorta right, but Newsom’s also kinda slimey, self-serving and angling for a presidential run. I don’t want him to be the next Dem pres candidate…

Also, Trump has always been Trump. Stupid sounding hot air is his thing, way before politics.

It’s almost like that was exactly what they said they do, and what keeps happening over and over again… not that you’re wrong.

You misinterpreted my, to be fair, vague statement. I meant AA is seemingly a bad source to read about opposition parties like the PKK, because of the obvious conflict of interest.

I mean, AP is a pretty decent source. It’s a nonprofit coop stretching back to 1846 in a country with, err, could-be-worse press freedom history, while AA has been explicitly state run since 1920, somewhat akin to VOA, BBC, Al Jazeera or RT I guess.

And yes, I know, AP is still an objectively bad source for specific topics, you don’t have to drill that in. So would whoever shills for the PKK, in some respects. But I’m not playing the game of “they did this and this, they can’t be trusted like them and them!” either. One has to look for conflict of interests everywhere, but it’s also okay to respect the good work long running institutions have done (like AA and this article).

Not really, heh.

There are different degrees though, and different environments for each one, which is what I meant to convey. Like, AA is a better source for Gaza information than, say, Turkish political opposition parties.