They could have gone with a "visor" frame design that would have been more fashionable, but I think this is pretty impressive for demonstrating the bare minimum amount of plastic needed to house holographic transparent displays, internal/external tracking sensors, and a sound system.
What they claim these glasses can do is absolutely incredible (we won't really know because they are only being used internally for further development).
There's a place for this, if it's entertaining. Memes, comedy, maybe some more legitimate uses too. A lot of YouTube is some guy just sitting in front of a camera in the most boring perfectly curated home office. Throw in something visually interesting that enhances the subject matter and I may watch more.
can't argue with that... if you don't want to VR, that's a nice setup. Easier to find your beer too.
This would ideally become standardized among web servers with an option to easily block various automated aggregators.
Regardless, all of us combined are a grain of rice compared to the real meat and potatoes AI trains on - social media, public image storage, copyrighted media, etc. All those sites with extensive privacy policies who are signing contracts to permit their content for training.
Without laws (and I'm not sure I support anything in this regard yet), I do not see AI progress slowing. Clearly inbreeding AI models has a similar effect as in nature. Fortunately there is enough original digital content out there that this does not need to happen.
If it doesn't offer value to us, we are unlikely to nurture it. Thus, it will not survive.
I don’t want to get in the way of your argument re. Usenet, but spinning hard drives will last longer if they stay on. Starting and stopping the spindle motor will impart the greatest wear. As long as you have the thermals managed, a spinning disk is a happy disk.
Just curious if you had a reference for this statement since it seems to be false in multiple ways.
This also works for binary cable or interface connectors formerly known as "male" and "female".
I want Ars content to be part of whatever training data is provided to the best models. How does that get done without appearing like they are being bought?
Even if their contract explicitly states that it is a data sharing agreement only and the products of the media organization (articles/investigations) are not grounds for breach or retaliation, it is assumed that there is now some impartiality in future reporting.
So, for all media companies, the options seem to be:
Is there a GPL or other license structure that permits data sharing for LLM training in a way that it does not get transformed into something evil?
I pay for Nebula and try to watch as much as I can there. The content is more "pleasant department store" and less "Mexican public market".
I do watch YouTube regularly when channel-surfing, but if I ever see an ad (which happens only on mobile devices), I close it immediately and do something else. It's not that I don't think I should be able to watch everything for $0, but YouTube ads are so jarring, random, irrelevant and just make me sick. They literally ruin whatever I was watching and make me sad to exist.
It can be exhausting to wade through the absolute meat market of click bait titles and thumbnails to find something that not only looks interesting but won't abuse me with infomercial-form audio/visuals.
YouTube enables and promotes the "content creators" who abuse human psychology to accumulate views, likes, subscriptions, etc. The best thing that could happen is they continue to be exposed as the drug dealer they are.
You would need to run the LLM on the system that has the GPU (your main PC). The front-end (typically a WebUI) could run in a docker container and make API calls to your LLM system. Unfortunately that requires the model to always be loaded in the VRAM on your main PC, severely reducing what you can do with that computer, GPU-wise.
What's the difference between one technology you don't understand (AI engine-assisted ) and another you don't understand (human-staffed radiology laboratory)?
Regardless of whether you (as a patient hopelessly unskilled in diagnosis of any condition) trust the method, you probably have some level of faith in the provider who has selected it. And, while they most likely will choose what is most beneficial to them (cost of providing accurate diagnoses vs. cost of providing less accurate diagnoses), hopefully regulatory oversight and public influence will force them to use whichever is most effective, AI or not.