p91paul

do consider that in Italy most credit cards cost around ~30€ per year + a 2€ tax for all months you spend more than ~70€ and most offer no benefits. Debit cards are offered for free by all banks. So credit is only used to rent cars (not really mandatory anymore) and if you really need the credit (but other ways of getting short term credit exist now).

I think one of the points of TFA was that other AI tools found many vulnerabilities; after having fixed those, mythos did find another vulnerability the others missed, but that seems to imply this model is only marginally better than the competition instead of being on a different league altogether like it's marketed. Paraphrasing the author: sure mythos will find lots of security issues in gnutls, but so will gpt or opus (they acknowledge explicitly that all those tools are getting very good).

the article begins like this:

Yesterday, I read a Wikipedia page for a book I’m about to review. I am still unsettled.

The page was stripped of reality, and in its place was a sanitized fairytale where Putin is good and the book — a brutal and damning historic account of Soviet abuses — is subtly and not so subtly undermined from every direction.

We have no idea which book that was and what was so unsettling about that entry

I did not say they did not read the title of the article. They clearly did. It's the rest of the content that was lost, such as the long focus on the sloppiness of the API provider

The article author did not even bother to read the article they were basically replying to. Otherwise he would have noticed that the main points the OP was complaining about were not about the agent, but the hosting provider providing an API allowing destructive operations easily, using tokens with no scopes, with backups stored in the same volume as main data, etc. So this article is actually agreeing with the complaints of the original article, just more generically and without spending an effort on it, doing that with a tone that implies the original article writer is an idiot.

I found it unsettling that in an article about political manipulation the author did not provide a link to the book entry

In general, with per minute rate limiting you limit load spikes, and load spikes are what you pay for: they force you to ramp up your capacity, and usually you are then slow to ramp down to avoid paying the ramp up cost too many times. A VM might boot relatively fast, but loading a large model into GPU memory takes time.

IANAL, but I think open source started with software since software has source and binary form. Now with compression and other shenanigans, probably even videos or images could be argued to have a source and binary form. I don't know a thing about multimedia, but people here saying this "open source" release is a good thing mention specifically the fact that it's the uncompressed version, or as the FSF would call it, "the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it".

The guy is actually the maintainer of those packages. So whoever got his credentials became able to perform releases on those packages. NPM itself does not build any package, it's just a place where people can publish stuff

Yes, you can have Android apps showing up in Gnome (e.g., likely all DEs) menu and open them directly in their own window without seeing the waydroid launcher.

I think it's a bit more subtle than that. The code of this tool runs in your browser and makes it download the model from huggingface. So it does not host the model or provide it to you, it just does the download on your behalf directly from where the owner of the model put it. The author of this tool is not providing the model to you, just automating the download for you. Not saying it's not a copyright violation, and IANAL, but it's not a obvious one.

Besides, can we even attract experienced developers to a non-glamorous industry like logistics?

I wouldn't worry about this. For some devs the industry might matter, but for many code is code, independently if it's for finance, healthcare or logistics. Just make sure salaries are in line with the market.

Internalizing devs will likely produce cost savings long term unless off the shelf tools are good enough for you, but it's an investment that needs long term commitment. Initially you'll still have to pay for your existing product plus the devs, so it'll feel like you just added a cost. Make sure you are committed enough to pass that phase. Your first hires should be able to work independently, talking directly with employees about requirements, without requiring extensive documentation or dedicated PMs before starting. Too much structure initially would be detrimental, you'll probably want to keep the team small anyway.

They are quite well differentiating generative AI models, that are not trained on customer data because they could leak customer data, and other types of AI models (e.g. recommendation systems) that do not work by reproducing content. The examples in the linked page are quite informative of the use cases that do use customer data.

You and many others here are conflating AI and LLMs. They are not the same thing. LLMs are a type of AI model that produce content, and if trained on customer data would gladly replicate them. However, the TOS explictly say that Generative AI models (=LLMs) are taken off the shelf and not retrained on customer data. Before LLMs exploded a year and a half ago lots of other AI models had been in place for several years in a lot of systems, handling categorization, search results ranking, etc. As they do not generate text or other content, they cannot leak data. The linked FAQ provides several examples of features based on such models, which are not LLMs: for example, they use customer data to determine a good emoji to suggest for reacting to a message based on the sentiment of the message. An emoji suggestion clearly has no potential of leaking customer data.

In other news, it has recently been discovered that water is wet.

well, you need to have something to run that business logic (which includes phoning home to the manufacturer), don't you? Java is as good as any other runtime.

Periodical reminder that copyright and GPL do not talk about linking.

At all.

GPLv2 does not, but both LGPL and GPLv3 explicitly mention linking in the license text, so this part of your comment is factually false. However, it's mostly used as an example; I agree any work with strict dependencies to a GPLed work might be considered a derivative even if the dependency is not expressed by linking.

We ignore their "we noticed you may benefit from Enterprise, call us today!" spam

Of course if you ignore their offers to talk with the sales team, you won't talk to them. Bigger companies than yours will be interested in their enterprise package and/or will want to negotiate volume discounts.

I don't think the user can be held liable under the GPL. The GPL says:

This License explicitly affirms your unlimited permission to run the unmodified Program

You may make, run and propagate covered works that you do not convey, without conditions so long as your license otherwise remains in force

So the GPL restrictions apply only on redistribution to others. You can do whatever you want on your systems.

However, in the case of Meta, if you are a Facebook user they are likely using your likes, friends, any personal information you give them, the content of your posts/comments/private messages to better target your ads. So you, in fact, agree with this ban.

In your society girls go around in underwear? nice!

Sorry, I really had to :)

I happen to personally know the author, and I'm not really surprised he pulled this off. Using him as a baseline of who is a real developer his extremely unhealthy. Please don't :)