Because trump is guaranteed going to convince the military and entire government to behave like nazi Germany. Anyone who disagrees with this obvious take is clearly a moron who loves fascism and hates freedom. Trump will kill everyone who isn’t purely white. It’s so obvious. It’s definitely better to have a turtle without a shell as president because trump is the biblical antichrist who will surely usher in the end times. Only an idiot couldn’t see this obvious fact.

Yeah, good thing all that matters for a president is the ability to have good ideas, and there is no need to be able to convey these ideas to other humans.

Your mistake is thinking that you are talking to people who think more than 2 feet in front of their noses.

Yeah, then we would all have so much more money all of a sudden, that would mean we could all buy so much more stuff. That’s definitely how money works.

My dude, no, I’m not the creator, settle down. Mixture of agents is free and open to anyone to use. Here is a demo of it by Matthew Berman. It isnt hard to set up.

https://youtu.be/aoikSxHXBYw

Believe it or not, openai is no longer making the best models. Claude Sonnet 3.5 is much better than openai’s best models by a considerable amount.

Other than having to scroll down an extra 3 centimeters to see your Google results, have you actually been inconvenienced by ai being used somewhere? All this outrageous about terrible ai getting in the way all the time is hilarious because it is absolutely manufactured by people who are obsessed with complaining and then parroted by people incapable of thinking for themselves. Nobody’s actually living worse lives because a few companies are trying out new tech. The fact of the matter is that there are obnoxious karens online, just like in real life.

You seem like someone who is probably self-righteous, obnoxious, and annoying to be around in real life, just like you are online.

It takes a lot of energy to train the models in the first place, but very little once you have them. I run mixture of agents on my laptop, and it outperforms anything openai has released on pretty much every benchmark, maybe even every benchmark. I run it quite a bit and have noticed no change in my electricity bill. I imagine inference on gpt4 must almost be very efficient, if not, they should just switch to piping people open sourced llms run through MoA.

Yeah. It’s really interesting because juniors and hobbyist are the ones getting used to how to interact with it. Since it is rapidly improving, it won’t be long until it will outpace the grunt work ability of seniors and the new seniors will be the ones willing and able to use it. Programming is switching away from being able to write tedious code and into being able to come up with ideas and convey them clearly to an llm. There’s going to be a real leveling of the playing field when even the best seniors won’t have any use for most of their grunt work coding skills. The jump up from Opus 3 to Sonnet 3.5 is absolutely insane, and Opus 3.5 should be here before too long.

That’s really interesting. For android studio it’s been absolutely crushing it for me. It’s taken some getting used to, but I’ve had it build an app with about 60 files. I’m no master programmer, but I’ve been a hobbyist for a couple decades. What it’s done in the last 5 days for me would have taken me 2 months easy, and there’s lots of extra touches that I probably wouldn’t have taken time to do if it wasn’t as simple as loading in a few files and telling it what I want.

Usually when I work on something like this, my todo list grows much faster than my ability to actually put it together, but with this project I’m quickly running out of even any features that I can imagine. I’ve not had any of the issues of it running in circles like I would often get it gpt4.

Have you coded with Claude Sonnet 3.5 yet? It is mind-blowingly better than Opus 3, which was already noticeably better than anything openAI has put out yet. Gpt 4 was nice to code with, but this is on a whole other level. I can’t imagine what Opus 3.5 will be able to do.

Because the headline goes along with all the people that thoughtlessly think ai is pointless, but the blog post itself is an incoherent mess that actually sometimes talks about how ai is useful and rapidly improving. It is a rambling mess. People who read it realise this. People who just read the headline assume it will say what they think. The chances that you made it through that whole thing are slim to none, but sure, maybe you read it, whatever. Congratulations, I’m sure it really improved your understanding.

What a good full set of possibilities since it’s certainly impossible for anyone on the internet to lie. How fun for a blog to contradict its main point.

Yeah, this is exactly what I think it is. I’m a bit concerned about how hard it’s going to hit a large number of people when they realize that they’re echo chamber of “LLMs are garbage and have no benefits” was so completely wrong. I agree that there are scary aspects of all this, but pretending like they don’t exist will just make it harder to deal with. It’s like denying that the smoke alarm is going off until your arm is on fire.

There is literally not a chance that anyone downvoting this actually read it. It’s just a bunch of idiots that read the title, like the idea that llms suck and so they downvoted. This paper is absolute nonsense that doesn’t even attempt to make a point. I seriously think it is ppprly ai generated and just taking the piss out of idiots that love anything they think is anti-ai, whatever that means.

This is that super forward-thinking EU tech protection we are always hearing about that the whole world should be so jealous of.

It blatantly contradicts itself. I would wager good money that you read the headline and didn’t go much further because you assumed it was agreeing with you. Despite the subject matter, this is objectively horribly written. It lacks a cohesive narrative.

Yes, and then you take the time to dig a little deeper and use something agent based like aider or crewai or autogen. It is amazing how many people are stuck in the mindset of “if the simplest tools from over a year aren’t very good, then there’s no way there are any good tools now.”

It’s like seeing the original Planet of the Apes and then arguing against how realistic the Apes are in the new movies without ever seeing them. Sure, you can convince people who really want unrealistic Apes to be the reality, and people who only saw the original, but you’ll do nothing for anyone who actually saw the new movies.

Yeah, this paper is time wasted. It is hilarious that they think that 3 years is a long time as a data scientists and this somehow gives them such wisdom. Then, they can’t even accurately extract the data from the chart that they posted in the article. On top of all this, like you pointed out, they can’t even keep a clear narrative, and they blatantly contradict themself on their main point. They want to pile drive people who come to the same conclusion as themself. What a strange take.

I don’t know how much stock to put in this author. They can’t even read the chart that they shared. They saw that 8% didn’t get use from gen ai and so assumed that 92% did. There are also 7% that haven’t tried using it yet. Ironically, pretty much any LLM with vision would have done a better job of comprehending the chart than this author did.