Tead the article. The cost isn't mentioned anywhere. If it did the cost to run on even SOTA LLMs would be negligible in medicine, probably not even a dollar.
It's different to me from text written by another person, because it is awful in a way that even a bad human writer can't replicate without first performing a lobotomy on themself.
> The architectural differences that made a console more compelling than a standalone PC are largely gone.
No, the main driver is still there. People do not want to build and maintain PCs. Your 14-year-old nephew doesn't want to do it, either. People want to turn on a box and play a game. I am technical and I want absolutely nothing to do with maintaining a PC. I'll take the console experience every single time.
People can buy a prebuilt pc running steamOS automagically updating itself with immutable images.
The advantage of consoles are:
- No minimum/recomended config to check and insurance that a game or an accesorry bought for a console gen will work well for that console gen. In term of game compat this is something Steam tried to with the steam deck but has no way to enforce really and the biggest one imho. When you buy a brand new "budget" computer in the price range of a console you usually knownyou won't be able to play some of the upcoming AAA titles at least woth decent graphic quality.
- availability in retail stores
- ability to sell games in the second hand market but I don't think this is something that is here to stay with the disappearance of physical medias
You’re mostly correct but there’s truth to the original statement. Back in the PlayStation/N64 through to PS3/Xbox 360, consoles were so different to each other and PCs that porting games was a major task that resulted in very different outcomes.
Since the PS4/Xbox One, they’ve been similar enough in underlying architecture that engines like Unreal have been able to smooth over the differences enough to make multiplatform technically viable. It’s meant companies like Capcom with RE Engine have made a huge success out of selling across all platforms, including PC. That freedom for publishers is a problem for console manufacturers who have fewer 3rd party exclusives as a result.
The performance cap on a console makes a big difference to me which is why I only play on the PC. It’s also not rocket science, you can just buy a good gaming PC. Games look an order of magnitude better on the PC in some cases.
This is why I've never gotten any of the more recent consoles (since the N64 or so)... many of my friends have them, and every time we try to turn them on to play a game they start updating and rebooting and updating... I can play games on my computer, which I have other incentives to keep up to date, so the maintenance time is amortized; just double click and it works.
Success in business is all about short-term thinking. If they destroy the Xbox brand today they can still pick it back up next year. Who else will you go with - Sony?
You've got under 5 minutes to decide whether or not a widely reported critical security vulnerability actively being exploited in the while is severe enough to warrant taking down your site or not. The downside for taking down your site is approximately 0, and the upside is that you don't get shrekd
No security expert can or should work that fast. Its a completely reasonable thing to do given the hyperbolic reporting just in case it turns out to be true. Some websites being down for a few hours doesn't end the world
> The downside for taking down your site is approximately 0
> Some websites being down for a few hours doesn't end the world
Many governmental websites are still down and they say might stay down for days or weeks. Some are not directly related to PHP, but auth doesn't work due to firewall hardening or similar. There definitely is a non-zero downside.
Agreed. This is all lazy chair hindsight talk, maybe by those not affected by it. In the moment you act on the imperfect information you have available and you use the safe than sorry rule. And to demand perfect information is also a fallacy, it doesn’t exist until after the fact.
I hear you, but also I'm not so sure. I remember Log4j, heartbleed, etc. and they were just as serious, but I don't recall people just going dark immediately. Scripts to validate whether or not you had exposure were built, people ran them, and if you did have exposure you started checking to see whether or not it was exploited. This timeline for this seems wildly different to me.
Because it’s not the same type. There was no actual info until the patch dropped, with some people in the know , which made it dangerous to leave your site up. The stopgaps were wild guesses. The multi-upload mitigation wouldn’t have worked.
There was no check that could be trusted to be the check to mitigate it. So that left the scenario that we went through.
There wasn't any info on the exploits beyond hearsay and the claim that they're very serious, so the risk assessment, sober or not, boils down to "do I trust the PHP people when they claim this is very serious"
Never had one even bring it up, although I've taken it before as a sleeping pill. I hadn't realized onset is as quick as Xanax, and the effect size looks good, but it's never done very much for me for anxiety.
Fair enough. I call it out because I know that some docs are trying it for people who have a history of substance abuse, and as a first line instead of jumping straight to benzos because of their risk profile. A lot of the reports I've read about hydroxizine are "it just knocks me out, which is I guess better than panicking", but also "it just knocks me out" seems preferable to risking dependency and the hell that benzo withdrawal can become.
Edit: Granted, falling asleep is not really conducive to being able to work. So I imagine there a number of people where "it made me fall asleep, but I can't do my job like that" is a non-starter, and short-term benzos is the only way forward.
It blew my mind to enter college and peer review other people's papers. Up until that point I understood that there was a range of capability with writing, but I figured that in college courses the floor would be pushed up. I was dead wrong, and it was shocking to me that these folks had managed to get all the way through high school writing like 8th graders.
ETA: This is over 20 years ago, btw. I hear it's gotten materially worse. That terrifies me.
The TOEFL is a joke. Several years ago (before LLMs) I proofread group project papers for my wife's coursework at a large US state university. The sections written by foreign students were usually even worse than what I would expect from a native 8th grader. I assume they had found some way to cheat.
TOEFL will grade people on how good they are at writing, but it does not approve or reject candidates. Maybe the threshold for acceptance was set too low?
Sure, that's probably a factor in addition to cheating. Most US colleges accept too many foreign students just to get their tuition, which leaves fewer spaces for more qualified US citizens.
Well, its meant as an exam for foreign students whose first language is not English. Its important to understand that they probably write much better in their first language.
I would not be surprised if a much larger volume of Clojure source code is in publicly-visible repositories. I’ve not met too many COBOL or Fortran hobbyists.
I suspect the frontier models have a more fundamental sense of programming logic and aren't limited to surface syntax. Has this been proven? I feel like the papers that have come out suggest this, but I haven't read one specifically testing it.
I'm surprised it did so poorly on COBOL.
How does it do on other esoteric languages or a newly made up one?
Re: Clojure, this test does show it performs about as well with Common Lisp as the others. I would expect it can handle other Lisps as well. They can all generally be thought of as extensions of a proto-Lisp.
reply