Okay, I understand better now, thanks.

That’s fair, I receive the same critique sometimes, probably why I feel drawn to your style of comms. I adapted, because what effect do my opinions have if no one is listening, and what is an opinion but an idea to shape the world around me. My own presentation was undermining my goals. That may not be the case for you.

Moving onto your statement here:
I believe I understand what you mean by, "there is no ‘the ai’ that can make decisions without human intent behind it’ ", but I am still confused by the idea you are attempting to convey. You really aren’t providing much info.

Given the components for an experiment:

1. A machine running an LLM.
2. Humans who operate the machine.
3. Intent, defined by the humans.
4. Outcomes, observed by a perfect detector.

If there is no decision being made by a machine, then given knowledge of 1, 2, and 3, then 4 will be absolutely predictable in every scenario, yes?

Is that the claim you are making?
Did I miss anything?
And finally, why is this important? You’re kinda making me connect all the dots for you, some help would be appreciated, I’d like to understand your idea.
Take all the time and space you need, I’d like to read it.

You seem focused on semantics. There is an alternative approach where you read a comment, consider their intent, and respond in kind. Semantics can be comforting to some due to their rigidity and law-like structure, but I doubt they’re helping you do anything but promote unnecessary conflict.

A conversation is occuring, and you respond, “Define ‘it’.” You’re just being unlikeable.

Anyway, if you’re a real person, consider this. If not, I understand you are following your directives and will remain needlessly argumentative. Good luck.

Python, “You can’t see _me.”

When killing children, it’s important to first identify parent child relationships, assuring total genealogical erasure.

Think of it as a game, the players are corpo, and gov.

Corpo hacks planet, gov says, “Hm, that’s pretty bad corpo, we could hold you accountable… but… that’s pretty neat, maybe share a lil with us how you achieved this terrible incident (that we totally don’t want to leverage against international peers) and we can forget this happened…”

A game of incentives.

If the gov comes down too hard, they could slow the development, the same development that they short-sightedly want to exploit in parallel with the accused.

A donut is just a hole with a circle drawn around it.

But that would require us to so something about it. Icky! I hate doing things!

Second point, what if we make the world a better place for no reason. You’ll really have egg on your face then.

How does it feel to be outsmarted. (very smug look)

fdlfuo

Ollama is better than GPT, but worse than basically every other local solution (from a performance perspective and an ethical perspective). I was annoyed when I found out, but made the switch to something llama based.

FDLFUO

Will do, I’ve been working on un-hardcoding some dev stuff and getting it ready to be published for general use. I will post the update on this sub-lemmy when it’s ready.

I actually run nox as my primary client because my server is headless so this is certainly relevant. Well, sort of headless, I broadcast a vnc server then use mullvad to manage qbittorrent thru localhost:8080.

Or if I wanna manage it from a different computer, create a ssh route to the server from that computer, and well… do the same thing as above.

The limitation was that I need to open a web browser for both of those scenarios, and I just want to do everything thru the terminal. I know, I’m weird. Ideally I’d love to have a fully featured CLI interface but for now just simple stuff.

Just don’t wanna go reinventing the wheel. But if my project is original then I will continue to work on it and share it once it’s a bit more polished. The community can always use more projects, right?

.?