What makes this Chatbot client different from just using it in the browser? My first thought was, it might get special permission to better interact with the system, like the agentic tools do. I assume it can better integrate into system with the taskbar maybe. Or maybe this is more efficient than just running the webbrowser. Or it might have special commandline arguments with special options?

Oh… wait its just an entire browser running a single tab. Alright then. Why does this need to be an app on its own? To me this is as useless as a native browser based Discord app… Just bookmark it in your browser and open it there. You can even customize it even more with browser addons.

Ah! I’ve seen a few times some artifacts with my RX 7600 on KDE too, but not on max/min, but randomly. I couldn’t reproduce it, so it is really hard to talk about such subject. As it just recently started (I’m on 7.1.6), I guess this is the same issue. Wondered if this is an issue with KDE or Krohnkite extension or my GPU dying.

So glad it’s “just” a bug in the Kernel. This is just a visual issue right? It doesn’t hurt I hope.

“The Problem with Linus Tech Tips: Accuracy, Ethics, & Responsibility” (44:14mins) by Gamers Nexus on August 14, 2023: YouTube or Invidious or Internet Archive

This video is not monetized. This video covers our serious concerns regarding the data accuracy of Linus Media Group, including Linus Tech Tips, ShortCircuit, and TechQuickie, particularly as it relates to rushing content out the door to favor – by staff’s own admission – quantity over quality. As the company continues to expand into its LTT Labs direction, the importance of accurate data increases; however, even as ‘only’ entertainment, there are still certain responsibilities to the consumer and the manufacturers to report fairly (and to have defined corrections processes in place). We tried to approach this as objectively as possible and hope that viewers are able to listen to the evidence we present, particularly as it relates to significant and frequent data errors that now present in nearly every technical review video.

TIMESTAMPS

00:00 - The Last 2 Weeks
01:40 - LMG is Rushing Too Much: Establishing the Premise
03:48 - LTT's Own Employees Agree
06:58 - This Isn't "Drama" & Risks
09:05 - Bad Data from Linus Tech Tips
10:12 - GPU Review Errors
15:02 - CPU Cooler Test Errors
19:09 - PSU Review Errors
19:53 - CPU Review Errors
22:39 - Asterisked Errors
26:15 - Ethical Concerns: Irresponsible Actions & Conflicts
28:21 - Ethical Concerns: The Review of Billet Labs
34:49 - Ethical Concerns: 'Not-Review' of Pwnage Mouse
36:53 - UNACCEPTABLE & The Community is Disturbing
39:22 - Unfair to Consumers, Manufacturers, & Reviewers

New video after Linus Tech Tips responds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3byz3txpso (only from 00:48 to 12:57 part)

Ah I see. I tried Fish several times before. Without getting into why I’m not using it, I totally forgot it had a web interface. I guess it makes sense for a shell, because if you screw the config up, then at least you can reconfigure it in the browser. That is the only use case I could think of that would be useful “to me”. But fastfetch on the other hand, is not a huge thing like a shell. I mean it would be bloat if we suddenly could configure grep or other terminal applications in the browser too. Wouldn’t it? That is how it feels to me.

Off course I’m not gatekeeping here, don’t get me wrong. Everyone should use and do what they want. I personally just don’t like the idea for fastfetch specifically to have a web interface. Not because it hurts me, but I think it makes the code of the program more complicated and bigger, potentially introducing bugs or security issues. For … nothing (in my opinion).

I’m not sure what exactly that is. fastfetch --config fish_config or fastfetch --config fish doesn’t work. So I guess that answers your question. :D

I feel like this is a bit over engineering. Browser based editor for a terminal tool that only has the job to fetch information, even an interactive user interface? The watch mode for auto refreshing data without rerunning the program seems to be a useful addition. Otherwise I could have just used a simple script with sleep that runs the command in intervals anyway. I just hope it does not get bloated with feature creep. Still may favorite fetch-tool since years. :-)

LOL oh thanks haha, I indeed didn’t know. xDD

Thanks. :-) Maybe people think I was trying to be mean or so. At least it stays at 67% upvote ratio somehow, haha:

No, read again what I explained before. I explained the technical problems of the architectural flaws. There are deep problems with LLMs and I explained why some people have a problem with it. You might not care, but that doesn’t solve the problems.

There is a difference. I explain why you are dishonest and misleading. I don’t just accuse. So its based off technical reasoning and not just personally attacking without reason. You just have no arguments left and just attack personally instead basing off on reasoning. That is a huge difference.

Unless you have good arguments, LLMs have architectural flaws in their design and need to change. And that is a factual correct statement, which I explained earlier. That has nothing to do with an opinion.

LOL I thought this was a meme post about 6 7. That’s why I didn’t look into until now, when I wanted to see some meme. :D Sorry not very helpful response, but its solved anyway.

If someone sneaks in spyware or malware inside the makepkg, that isn’t arch’s fault, that’s the maintainers fault of the makepkg.

I don’t think that anyone argued otherwise.

I even said it in the very reply you are replying:

The AUR is managed and operated by the Archlinux team. As the packages are community-driven content, they cannot guarantee and give support, because it is not their package.

You just come up with analogies that does not address the issues I am talking about. We are talking about the source code the LLMs copy and analyze and then not respect the license. They fail to provide the source code and source material they analyzed, so we could build the Ai models from scratch. And I am not talking about the data after training.

Your hammer analogy (and others) are absolutely not addressing any of these issues. Instead you talk about the end user that can misuse the tool, which is NOT what I am talking about. And now you start attacking personally because you ran out of arguments. Just wasting peoples time.

It’s like if I say that hammers are fantastic but everyone says that they are horrible because they have conceptual problems, murderous users are hitting people in the head with them, the companies are stealing wood and cutting down the rain forest to make them

Again wrong analogy just to disagree. That is not the conceptional problem with LLMs I talked about. It is a matter of fact that the LLMs are trained on data without respecting their license such as GPL, even worse when generating content. These are factual problems with the concept of LLMs. This is not like a hammer that was designed for a specific purpose, that is then misused as something else. That is not the issue whatsoever here. The design and philosophy of LLMs is deeply flawed in many ways.

The hammer analogy shows either you try to change the topic, or you don’t understand the issues I’m talking about. That is completely false analogy to the issues I brought up. Same with a knife or even a game controller. Just because you can misuse it, does not mean its wrongly designed. The user didn’t use it properly. That is NOT what I was talking about.

It’s not just simulation heavy games that stress the CPU a lot. There are lot of single player games that would (or could) benefit from this. Things like enemy and character ai (not that LLM Ai of sort, I mean just the normal game logic) are stressing the CPU a lot and can cause stutter in certain regions of the games. It does not mean a constant stress, but like in Witcher 3, Baldur’s Gate 3 or Crimson Desert in certain situations when its not about the graphics anymore (dungeon with lots of enemies, town with lots of people).

But we need more testing with those games before coming to a conclusion off course. We can just speculate at this point.

Using AI isn’t bad. The problems that people have with it has nothing to do with the technology itself.

We literally discussed about the problems of Ai the whole time… LLMs have conceptional problems, regardless who uses it. It is the technology that is the problem first, second problem are the companies abusing it even more and then the careless or greedy users too. Its threefold. Saying it has nothing to do with the technology itself is therefore wrong.

BTW so you agree with me then, because the only solution you see here to throw it away. Because what I described is not hallucinated by me, this is how its operate. It was to correct you for your wrong example with looking up a single information from Wikipedia.

we have to throw this technology out the window. It seems like a bad idea to do that though.

Why? Besides that’s not possible in the near future, it could be made illegal and then suddenly the biggest companies (the driver behind it) would have to stop. This wouldn’t eliminate all Ai tools everywhere, so getting rid of it is probably not possible anymore.

But that wasn’t my suggestion either. And we don’t have to throw it away, we have to comply. It needs to change.

I think they’re arguing that if I can look at the Wikipedia and tell you that an avalanche in Pakistan killed ten climbers, then AI should be allowed to as well.

This is misleading and dishonest. Its not just looking up a single free information. Ai does more than that. Ai will not only scrape and copy the entire article, it will also scrape and copy the entirety of Wikipedia. There are licenses attacked to the Wikipedia article we have to follow to, if we scrape and use it for other purposes. It will also scrape the entire web. That is not the same as just looking up an Avalanche in Pakistan killed ten climbers.

The difference is, you know which book you have a concern with. Ai does not operate like that. With using Ai, you don’t know which book the data is from and it is not possible for the Ai to tell you that. There are conceptional problems with Ai. Your book example does not work here, because that works differently than Ai.

If a company unethically steals data and publishes a book with that data, we don’t say that there are legitimate concerns using books.

Off course we say its a legitimate concern if someone unethically steals data and publishes a book with that data… The point of scraping and stealing data without respecting its license, training their software with it and using it commercially (or even non commercially) without giving even credit and not respecting its original license?

the problem that people … have with AI isn’t with the technology itself nor its use, but the methods by which the companies “grow and harvest it”, so to speak.

No, its not just the methods. I am talking about deep problems with the technology, the methods how companies go with it, and then its usage from company and end user. Ai trained with those data and used makes it impossible to respect the original license, for the user. So in this case, the company using the Ai AND the user of the model violate licenses. Maybe. Maybe not, if the data allows it. But we don’t know and CANNOT check and know for sure, that’s the problem. Just because you don’t understand the issue or don’t care does not make it less of a problem.

As an example with software licenses like GPL requires that any derivative works using this source code (such as Linux or whatever my personal program is licensed under GPL) has to be GPL licenses (Open Source) too. That is not debatable. That is how this license work. Now the Ai can be trained on this data, using the source code, and then? See where this goes? That is only one generalized example.