Ironically, i am feeling attacked right now…

You mean when the training data becomes more complete. But that’s the thing, when this issue was being tested, the’AI’ would swear up and down that the normally filled wine glasses were full, when it was pointed out that it was not indeed full, the ‘AI’ would agree, and change some other aspect of the picture it didn’t fully understand. You got wine glasses where the wine would half phase out of the bounds of the cup. And yet still be just as empty. No amount of additional checks will help without an appropriate reference

I use ‘AI’ extensively, i have one running locally on my computer, i swap out from time to time. I don’t have anything against its use with certain exceptions. But i can not stand people personifying it beyond its scope

Here is a good example. I am working on an APP so every once in a wile i will send it code to check. But i have to be very careful. The code it spits out will be unoptimized like: variable1=IF (variable2 IS true, true, false) .

Some have issues with object permanence, or the consideration of time outside its training data. Its like saying a computer can generate a true random number, by making the function to calculate a number more convoluted.

I mean, they can assume fantasy, and it will hold weight because laws are interpreted by the court, not because the court is correct.

“it was unable to link the concepts until it was literally created for it to regurgitate it out“

-WraithGear

The’ problem was solved before their patch. But the article just said that the model is changed by running it through a post check. Just like what deep seek does. It does not talk about the fundamental flaw in how it creates, they assert if does, like they always did

1 it’s not full, but closer then it was.

2. I specifically said that the AI was unable to do it until someone specifically made a reference so that it could start passing the test so it’s a little bit late to prove much.

Yes, on the second part. Just rearranging or replacing words in a text is not transformative, which is a requirement. There is an argument that the ‘AI’ are capable of doing transformative work, but the tokenizing and weight process is not magic and in my use of multiple LLM’s they do not have an understanding of the material any more then a dictionary understands the material printed on its pages.

An example was the wine glass problem. Art ‘AI’s were unable to display a wine glass filled to the top. No matter how it was prompted, or what style it aped, it would fail to do so and report back that the glass was full. But it could render a full glass of water. It didn’t understand what a full glass was, not even for the water. How was this possible? Well there was very little art of a full wine glass, because society has an unspoken rule that a full wine glass is the epitome of gluttony, and it is to be savored not drunk. Where as the reference of full glasses of water were abundant. It doesn’t know what full means, just that pictures of full glass of water are tied to phrases full, glass, and water.

It can, the only thing stopping it is if it is specifically told not to, and this consideration is successfully checked for. It is completely capable of plagiarizing otherwise.

If a human did that it’s still plagiarism.

If what you are saying is true, why were these ‘AI’s” incapable of rendering a full wine glass? It ‘knows’ the concept of a full glass of water, but because of humanities social pressures, a full wine glass being the epitome of gluttony, art work did not depict a full wine glass, no matter how ai prompters demanded, it was unable to link the concepts until it was literally created for it to regurgitate it out. It seems ‘AI’ doesn’t really learn, but regurgitates art out in collages of taken assets, smoothed over at the seams.

So like the steam workshop? Cool.

I prefer the nub over the track pad any day of the week.

He knows this is false. It’s bait, that even i see this time. There really is nothing to see here

My comment is germane to the post comparing the two devices in an aspect that exemplifies how they can’t be compared, and tries to spin it as a negative, while attempting to bury its positive.

The fact you say that the switch is not like any other computer is both true in the sense that i already argued, and false in that it IS yet just another computer, but with a walled garden.

If there was any a comment that was irrelevant, it would be yours.

How is that different from any other computer buying from steam, ever? In the history of all computer games? A steam deck is a hand held computer with a community large enough, and system specs stable enough to have a rating on potentially any PC, and most Nintendo games in existence. Compared to nintendo’s walled garden. Your comparing apples to oranges.

Yea no matter how you slice it, there are no good use of tariffs, and if one were to insist, then it would only be like just barley enough to push up the price above parity, and only on very select items. But then if the other country does it back it goes in favor to the nation that is more industrial.

But these local companies just jack up their price to be competitive to the new tariffed foreign price and pocket the money.

I was thinking about the protectionism though… like in order for the tariff to work, the us would have to also manufacture the good that is being tariffed. But we don’t produce a lot here…and also even if we did… i guarantee the us business would jack up the prices to be competitive with the foreign price After tariffs and pocket the money. Making the whole thing moot.

They would rather usher the death of their site then allow someone to answer a question on their watch, it’s true.

Wow, ok. This blog does not indicate any reason for it’s decline. I guess, someday for some reason Steam will be abandoned, nothing lasts forever. But the criticisms it does bring is

• steam got sued by Australia in 2014 because they did not offer refunds. Except neither did anyone else.
• Steam takes 30% of the profit. Yet the author even agreed that the competitor Epic games Store does not offer as good a shopping experience, does not have the player base, and the author does not mention all the other amenities valves offers.
• epic games store reports they do not make a profit at 12% and failed to mention that a lot of the disdain of EGS is how they treated customers
• the author states that steam market dominance is a monopoly. That game makers are FORCED to use steam due to steam holding its customer reach behind its service. Which is a terrible take. These game makers could publish on their own! They could publish on GOG or EGS. Gamers are free to choose their platform and so is game makers, and the fact that steams platform is so good its become the defacto PC game launcher, is a value to those shopping for a launcher. I literally bought some games outside of steam because they launched independently.

Um… yea? It’s not supposed to? Let’s ignore how dangerous and foolish it would be to allow llm’s admin control of a system. The thing that prevents it from doing that is well, the llm has no mechanism to do that. The best it could do is ask you to open a command line and give you some code to put in. Its kinda like asking siri to preheat your oven. It didn’t have access to your ovens system.

You COULD get a digital only stove, and the llm could be changed to give it to reach out side itself, but its not there yet, and with how much siri miss interprets things, there would be a lot more fires