Perhaps, I think its more likely that active moderation is the cause of that rather than word lists that let p!ss, pi$s and pιss through when trying to block piss.
Yeah the article seems to be "Nuclear and fossil fuels are reliable and list that as an advantage, geothermal is also reliable and lists that as an advantage", to which: yeah? That is the case. The problem with fossil fuels is that they are an exceptionally good energy source, apart from the fact that they are slowly choking the planet. If they werent so good at providing energy they would be a lot easier to replace.
The Scunthorpe problem is hard, and any simple blacklist method is bound to give both false positives and false negatives.
Not the parent, but LLMs dont solve anything, they allow more work with less effort expended in some spaces. Just as horse drawn plough didnt solve any problem that couldnt be solved by people tilling the earth by hand.
As an example my partner is an academic, the first step on working on a project is often doing a literature search of existing publications. This can be a long process and even more so if you are moving outside of your typical field into something adjacent (you have to learn what excatly you are looking for). I tried setting up a local hosted LLM powered research tool that you can ask it a question and it goes away, searches arxiv for relevant papers, refines its search query based on the abstracts it got back and iterates. At the end you get summaries of what it thinks is the current SotA for the asked question along with a list of links to papers that it thinks are relevant.
Its not perfect as you'd expect but it turns a minute typing out a well thought question into hours worth of head start into getting into the research surrounding your question (and does it all without sending any data to OpenAI et al). That getting you over the initial hump of not knowing exactly where to start is where I see a lot of the value of LLMs.
I literally just asked to clarify your position, that you chose to project transphobia onto me from that says more about you than me.
Fair enough, I think its a rather bizarre take that we shouldnt try stop people who havent fully developed their reasoning capacities from harming themselves but at least you're consistent.
Just for clarity, are you saying that all rules and regulation which discriminate against young people are inherently bad? e.g. banning them from consuming tobacco, having gambling adverts placed on their shows or being allowed in nightclubs?
Yes because Lemmy is so full of people praising Elon. Couldn't be because you're acting like an ass.
So if I modify an LLM to have true randomness embedded within it (e.g. using a true random number generator based on radioactive decay ) does that then have free will?
If viruses have free will when they are machines made out of rna which just inject code into other cells to make copies of themselves then the concept is meaningless (and also applies to computer programs far simpler than llms).
So where does it end? Slugs, mites, krill, bacteria, viruses? How do you draw a line that says free will this side of the line, just mechanics and random chance this side of the line?
I just dont find it a particularly useful concept.
Aye, there's the rub. Contending that reliability of electricity generation isnt an important fact is wishful thinking at best (and boosterism of something you're invested in at worst). There is nowhere bigger than an isolated town or so that manages a grid without either reliable generation or power exchanges with another location that does have reliable generation.