To me, the fact that you can configure your "GF" sounds very creepy. No real person is always happy, positive, or understanding. Especially for people with poor social skills, this sounds like it would just exacerbate their problems and make it more difficult for them to connect with humans.
Would you run the LLM extractor across every page? Especially for larger scale projects, such as scraping entire product catalogues, this sounds very expensive. Maybe you could use the AI to generate selectors from examples that can then be applied to all other pages of the same structure?
Are there even similar solutions available commercially? Even at a size of JPM, I highly doubt that they would develop such a complex system in-house. Also, for any high-skill job, I feel such an "activity metric" is utterly useless and not correlated with value contributions.
Here I can probably weigh in a little. While we can argue day and night over whether tracking this is worthwhile, JPM ( and likely Discover ) has some history ( and manpower to do it ) of building their own systems when reasonable.
I think it's unrealistic to expect a multi-national government funded organisation to offer a commodity service at a competitive price. With all the conflicting national interests and bureaucracy that come with this funding model, how should they compete with much leaner, commercial organisations that are only responsible to their shareholders? But does it really matter? If the main objective of the Ariane Group is to offer Europe independence by providing access to space, I think that’s worth a premium.
> it's unrealistic to expect a multi-national government funded organisation
Maybe then those organizations should admit that rather then lie about it. ArianeGroup always justified Ariane 6 early on by claiming with it they would be competitve with SpaceX.
Of course they thought about competitive with SpaceX in 2014, not 2024 when Falcon 9 flies weekly and Starship is deep in development.
> If the main objective of the Ariane Group is to offer Europe independence by providing access to space, I think that’s worth a premium.
Maybe then they should have had a clear strategy around achieving this goal effectively rather then deluding themselves.
Europe having Ariane 6 and Vega rocket for example make no sense. They could have one engine, for example Merlin 'European Version' and use it as the only engine one all their rockets.
However they have an incredibly complex bespoke first stage engine, and complex bespoke second stage engine. And lots of different solid rockets and so on.
If they had planned for making the most expensive possible thing to achieve independence they certainly managed it.
> Europe having Ariane 6 and Vega rocket for example make no sense. They could have one engine...
It absolutely makes sense, Vega is basically an Ariane 5 solid rocket booster that was turned into an actual rocket, both are/were made by Avio who now make the Ariane 6 boosters.
And yet if you actually go and look at the cost of the Vega series of rockets its very expensive. Just using the same expensive stuff multiple times doesn't make it a good policy.
And then you keep reading and realize that Vega is not just a solid booster, but a 4 stage rocket.
They should’ve skipped Ariane 6 and do Ariane 5ME instead and make the next vehicle a reusable one. Ariane 6 doesn’t really buy them anything more than Ariane 5ME, just buys more risk and more development cost (this latter thing may actually have been the unstated INTENT of some stakeholders…).
> I think it's unrealistic to expect a multi-national government funded organisation to offer a commodity service at a competitive price.
Except that they used to. They certainly beat the pants off of ULA (nee Boeing/Lockheed Martin) when it came to competitive GEO/GTO launches.
> But does it really matter? If the main objective of the Ariane Group is to offer Europe independence by providing access to space, I think that’s worth a premium.
It's a lot nicer to have a European rocket program that happens to make lots of money on the commercial market so that the member states basically don't have to fund it.
The current situation, where ArianeSpace doesn't win that many contracts, so it has to be heavily subsidized by member states is much more difficult. When it comes to politics, there are always more hungry mouths than there is available bread.
If everybody is a fool, and you are the best of them you can be successful. But once the race really starts and its not just US govenrment funded monopoly against European government funded monopoly, its gone be difficult.
> The current situation
Ariane 5 had some commercial success but rocket development was always funded by member states.
> If the main objective of the Ariane Group is to offer Europe independence by providing access to space, I think that’s worth a premium.
I mean in that case, wouldn't the superior option be having a more cost competitive private launch provider in Europe? that way you'd get both European independence and lower prices. Surely there's a way to foster that situation, since that's what the US has.
Having the EU work this out would be hard since pork barrel is kind of part of the way the whole thing is done. You need to have multiple production points, factories etc in order for the EU to do anything like this.
Exactly this. The diversity of interests means EU will never be as operationally efficient, and therefore as low cost, as SpaceX.
EU's strength is that diversification. They should lean into that and find a way (?) to benefit commercially. I don't know quite what that is, but someone needs to come up with something. Because the inefficiency is baked in.
We should demand more and should not accept subpar performance.
This is somewhat like Nokia vs Apple, only worse because of the bureaucratic EU-wide red tape involved.
Yes, Europe should have its own space industry and be independent. But we should not accept rubbish or "paying a premium". We should demand more and aim at the top. Europe deserves it and can achieve it.
SpaceX has rocked the boat and thay should be an opportunity for drastic changes, especially in view of this fiasco.
In my experience, the threshold to be useful is much lower than GPT-3.5. These smaller models can "easily" be finetuned to achieve a comparable performance on a specific task. For example, I've achieved promising results for data summarisiation and image captioning (BLIP2-based) using Alpaca.
Also, server/hardware costs are still a limiting factor for running and finetuning the larger 33/65B Llama models. Especially, if they can only be used for personal toy projects.
I don’t use LLMs for anything image related, so I can’t speak to their value there, but almost all simpler NLP tasks are IMO better handled using other techniques that predate them. I’ve yet to see an example where fine-tuning is cheaper/more efficient/better performing than older solutions to these problems.
If older techniques work for you, there is of course no reason to switch to LLMs besides general curiousity or to explore what's possible already. That said, in my case I was enable to generate much more engaging text summaries of tabular data using a Llama derivative.
In the long-term, I doubt that OpenAI will have a monopoly on LLMs. We're still very early in the development, and I don't see why other organisations, won't be able to catch up. The instruction-tuned LLaMa versions already look very promising, even with rather small & low-quality data sets. Compared to other technologies, the investment-requirements for LLMs still seem to be relativly low and something a number of companies or governments are able to finance.
I truly hope you're right. But there are a lot of factors at play apart from compute power. So many factors from UI/UX, censorship, pricing, to responsiveness need to be just right for product success. We are in a technology preview stage so the economics don't need to make sense for OpenAI (atleast for now), but they need to for the other companies since they're beholden to shareholders.
Bing chat is dumber than a bag of rocks although it supposedly uses GPT-4 when asked the same questions which is I believe a direct consequence of the requirement it be open to the the general public.
Add to the fact that GPT-4 handles technical questions well which is what makes it useful for me, but I'm worried future LLMs will be more tuned to handle non-technical questions with vague responses as way of focusing on the average layman user.
Clowning in modern/new circus is much more related to physical comedy than to "traditional" clown as we expect. There are still some of the traditional roles like the whiteclown, the auguste, the character but they are reinvented/remixed with more outlandish comedy and acts like acrobatics and body tricks (one of the best clowns I've seen has some amazing ping-pong balls juggling with very physical acrobatics in them).
The people I know who worked in CWB have very different styles of clowning, they all work to adapt their acts to the local culture, it's really important for CWB volunteers to understand and cater to the local culture, they do research to avoid anything that could be remotely offensive, etc.
Just to source this a bit: my girlfriend is a circus artist here in Sweden so I have some insider view into it, it's actually a very fascinating part of the performing arts.
A friend of mine is a professional clown (https://www.clintbolster.com/) and honestly it's such a respectable profession and form of art. So much goes into a ten minute show - years of work and planning and practice. More work than software, I'd say.
Interestingly enough (although not surprising) he is friends with a close friend of my girlfriend, an Australian aerial straps, swinging pole, and Chinese pole artist :)
> More work than software, I'd say.
Living around many of these performers really put that into perspective to me. Working in the arts is such a completely different game than whatever white-collar job we might have, more akin to scientists in STEM (in the sense of how much passion they have while not being well paid).
There's so much that goes into what looks like a simple show that really made me appreciate much more any form of entertainment or art the past years.
> Interestingly enough (although not surprising) he is friends with a close friend of my girlfriend, an Australian aerial straps, swinging pole, and Chinese pole artist :)
It's a surprisingly small community!
> There's so much that goes into what looks like a simple show that really made me appreciate much more any form of entertainment or art the past years.
I also grew an appreciation for much I was willing to pay to see good art being performed when I learned of the effort going into it. Sometimes if a musical or play doesn't quite hold my interest, I still find it highly enjoyable due to the sheer skill and work involved in just DELIVERING the content, regardless of the content itself.
Looking at some of the videos and pictures, it seems they aren't always wearing what I'd call "stereotypical" clown outfits - just maybe some light makeup and clothes that clearly stand out, while they do "funny things". Juggling bowling pins and dropping them is probably universally understood, even if you have no idea what bowling is.
Why not have both? Earlier in my career, I was very invested in my job as well and didn't mind working 12h+ as I was learning a lot. And I think this mindset really helps to progress quickly. But at some point, it just became unsustainable. I still love my job but also my personal life outside of work.
