FaceDeer

Why do i want a copy of something I am only going to watch once?

Delete it when you’re done if you never want to watch it again.

And why should I keep a copy if I can just stream it again from the same or some different site for free in the future?

I thought you just said you wouldn’t want to watch it again?

Obviously there are people who do watch pirate streams. I’m just pointing out how odd it is in the context of this thread, where people are complaining about dependency on outside resources, and how alien it is to my personal approach to this kind of thing.

It really baffles me when I hear about “pirate streaming sites” being taken down. Why are those even a thing? If you’re into piracy already, why not download a copy?

The problem is they’re going to either try to make money with it or do some black hat shit that this will help facilitate.

And then they will fail at it, because that’s not what these tools are for. I don’t see why this is a problem.

If someone is asking you “hey, I want to use this Replit thing to build a competitor to Amazon, I have an MBA so I’m sure I can do it. Want to invest?” Then by all means try to talk them down off the ledge or make sure you’re far enough away to not be in the splash zone.

But this is someone saying “I want to make tools that non-experts can use to do productive things.” I think it’s not fair or reasonable to oppose that. Making computers more accessible and generally useful to the public is a good thing.

This clickbait headline has been making the rounds for a few days now. Replit’s CEO is not saying that AI has “replaced” professional coders, he’s talking about their company’s target market.

It’s like a website provider making tools to simplify website creation for small businesses so that any mom-and-pop store can have a basic website, and saying “we’re not aiming these tools at professional website authors.” They’re simply not trying to occupy that niche.

Get ready for a bunch of unskilled people making the shittiest apps imaginable.

Those apps have their place. Why shouldn’t an “unskilled” person be able to make some little tool that does some specific task they need done? I’m a professional coder and I make “shitty little apps” all the time for throwaway tasks. I think it’ll be empowering for the average user to be able to do that sort of thing too.

Obviously, don’t go buying such apps and installing them on your own phone or whatever. That’s where professionals still have their place.

Yes, and? Measuring an energy storage facility in terms of power is not a good idea.

If you asked someone how big a water tank was and they said “five liters per second”, would that be useful?

Of course not. People want to be angry at AI, nuance would interfere with the dopamine hit.

Are we, though? Newer models almost universally perform better than older ones, adjusted for scale. What signs are you seeing?

You are speaking of “model collapse”, I take it? That doesn’t happen in the real world with properly generated and curated synthetic data. Model collapse has only been demonstrated in highly artificial circumstances where many generations of model were “bred” exclusively on the outputs of previous generations, without the sort of curation and blend of additional new data that real-world models are trained with.

There is no sign that we are at “the peak” of AI development yet.

And yet the synthetic training data works, and models trained on it continue scoring higher on the benchmarks than ones trained on raw Internet data. Claim what you want about it, the results speak louder.

Yeah, AI has become good enough at this point that you can provide it with a large blob of context material - such as API documentation, source code, etc. - and then have it come up with its own questions and answers about it to create a corpus of “synthetic data” to train on. And you can fine-tune the synthetic data to fit the format and style that you want, such as telling it not to be snarky or passive-aggressive or whatever.

Stack Overflow has been toxic for a long time already. It’s one of the things that a lot of people seem pleased to see AI devour.

I have little to say about this because it’s basically nonsense.

The top 100 accounts already own 35% of the network and rising … that would give Lido and Coinbase a combined 51% of the stake

These two statements are completely incompatible with each other, for example. Also, the top 100 accounts only holding 35% of the network is remarkably good. And Lido is not controlled by a single individual or organization. And holding 51% of the stake means nothing on Ethereum, it works differently from Bitcoin. And the Gini coefficient is something that applies to national economies, not to blockchains. And I could go on, but this is just nonsense and you clearly have no idea what you’re talking about.

Admit what? There are a huge range of possible designs that could be called “Proof of Stake”, and some of them could easily have that flaw. You can always design something poorly. Ethereum, the most widely used Proof of Stake token, doesn’t have that flaw in its design.

Modern blockchains like Ethereum don’t use ASICs and don’t consume any more energy than a normal database would. They use proof-of-stake rather than proof-of-work.

There is one core purpose that blockchains solve that traditional databases don’t; decentralization.

If you’re running something that can work just fine with a centralized database, go ahead and do that. Use the right tool for the job.

Blockchains are for applications where you can’t depend on a “trusted authority” to support you. When you want to be sure you’re free of any outside interference in the things you’re doing, that no server can “go down” and take all of your data or operations with it.

An example of a non-financial-related activity I can offer is the Ethereum Name Service, ENS, which is a decentralized version of the DNS system. You can register a domain name with it and never have to worry about it being “seized” or going offline due to a networking failure.

You have to solve the sibyl problem, or else someone can just run 10,000 copies of the validator software on one computer,

That’s solved on Ethereum by requiring you to stake tokens that cost money. You would need an enormous amount of money to afford to spin up 10000 validators.

submit enough votes for a false record that it overwhelms any competing votes

I’m afraid you’re not very familiar with how Ethereum works. 10,000 validators isn’t anywhere near enough to disrupt the system, all you would do is burn your stake and lose all that money if you tried that.

Even if you acquired enough stake to prevent finality - 2/3 of the total stake would be required, costing tens of billions of dollars and taking years to work your way through the entry queue - all you’d do then is cause a huge annoyance to everyone on the system while your tens of billions rapidly burned down to below the threshold and finality resumed again. You wouldn’t be able to insert “fake” transactions.

People have been working on blockchain technology for a long time, these sorts of basic attacks have long ago been accounted for.

No, that’s not how proof of stake works. Or it doesn’t have to, at any rate. Ethereum’s staking token is not a governance token, holding a lot of it doesn’t give you any “ownership” of the blockchain as a whole.

Quite the opposite in fact, if you’re staking millions of dollars worth of tokens then that means the blockchain has millions of dollars worth of your assets “held hostage” to ensure you follow the blockchain’s rules. If you don’t then the hostage gets slashed.

“.glb file specification” gets that as its first hit on Google, too. OP was just being incredibly lazy and ironically was expecting the search engine to figure out what she wanted without telling it explicitly.

I just wish they were interesting NPCs.