Worst hypothesis they just need to mess around a bit. For example I don’t think that queerasfu.ck
would be registered.
This account is being kept for the posterity, but it won’t see further activity past February.
If you want to contact me, I’m at /u/lvxferre@mander.xyz
Worst hypothesis they just need to mess around a bit. For example I don’t think that queerasfu.ck
would be registered.
They could get a .ck domain instead and move to queer.as.fu.ck, no?
Removed by mod
Sorry for the double reply. Here’s a practical idea: what if the mods of this comm contacted lemmy.ml’s admins? Ideally doing two things:
Among the admins I think that Nutomic would be the best to contact, given the github thread.
You’re talking about your thread about Mahou Shoujo ni Akogarete, right? It’s still in the modlog for me, even in private mode. I don’t think that they removed the entry.
Another important detail is that Digg v4 pissed off most of the userbase, so the impact was pretty much immediate. Reddit APIcalypse pissed off only power users instead; the impact will only come off later (sadly likely past IPO).
Lunix sucks so much that it got stuck into the version 2 for years.
Removed by mod
In my opinion, the migration is sensible because:
For context, I encourage people to check this discussion in the “join Lemmy” site github. Have in mind that both of the Lemmy developers in that discussion are also admins of the lemmy.ml instance, and they clearly disagree if the instance in question should be considered as “hosting CSAM” or not.
I think that this community should migrate, but for a different reason: topic.
The topic of lemmy.ml is privacy and free-as-freedom software. Most other content here is off-topic, including anime. It was fine when it was just lemmy.ml and lemmygrad.ml, as you’d have no other place to discuss anime in Lemmy, but now the situation is different.
And ideally, communities should be managed/moderated/administered by people who know well the topic of the community.
Musk being an assumer (note how he’s vomiting certainty on future events) doesn’t surprise me a tiny bit.
If I were to discipline my cats by picking them up, one of them would be exactly like in this pic. The other would be tearing my arms apart with the claws of her back legs.
Even here in South America, depending on the region, they’re invasive.
Let’s go simpler: what if your instance was allowed to copy the fed/defed lists from other instances, and use them (alongside simple Boolean logic plus if/then statements) to automatically decide who you’re going to federate/defederate with? That would enable caracoles and fedifams for admins who so desire, but also enable other organically grown relations.
For example. Let’s say that you just joined the federation. And there are three instances that you somewhat trust:
Then you could set up your defederation rules like this:
Of course, that would require distinguishing between manual and automatic fed/defed. You’d be able to use the manual fed/defed from other instances to create your automatic rules, to avoid deadlocks like “Alice is blocking it because Bob is blocking it, and Bob is blocking it because Alice is doing it”.
Aaaaah. I really, really wanted to complain about the excessive amount of keys.
(My comment above is partially a joke - don’t take it too seriously. Even if a new key was added it would be a bit more clutter, but not that big of a deal.)
The source that I’ve linked mentions semantic embedding; so does further literature on the internet. However, the operations are still being performed with the vectors resulting from the tokens themselves, with said embedding playing a secondary role.
This is evident for example through excerpts like
The token embeddings map a token ID to a fixed-size vector with some semantic meaning of the tokens. These brings some interesting properties: similar tokens will have a similar embedding (in other words, calculating the cosine similarity between two embeddings will give us a good idea of how similar the tokens are).
Emphasis mine. A similar conclusion (that the LLM is still handling the tokens, not their meaning) can be reached by analysing the hallucinations that your typical LLM bot outputs, and asking why that hallu is there.
What I’m proposing is deeper than that. It’s to use the input tokens (i.e. morphemes) only to retrieve the sememes (units of meaning; further info here) that they’re conveying, then discard the tokens themselves, and perform the operations solely on the sememes. Then for the output you translate the sememes obtained by the transformer into morphemes=tokens again.
I believe that this would have two big benefits:
And it might be an additional layer, but the whole approach is considerably simpler than what’s being done currently - pretending that the tokens themselves have some intrinsic value, then playing whack-a-mole with situations where the token and the contextually assigned value (by the human using the LLM) differ.
[This could even go deeper, handling a pragmatic layer beyond the tokens/morphemes and the units of meaning/sememes. It would be closer to what @njordomir@lemmy.world understood from my other comment, as it would then deal with the intent of the utterance.]
Not quite. I’m focusing on chatbots like Bard, ChatGPT and the likes, and their technology (LLM, or large language model).
At the core those LLMs work like this: they pick words, split them into “tokens”, and then perform a few operations on those tokens, across multiple layers. But at the end of the day they still work with the words themselves, not with the meaning being encoded by those words.
What I want is an LLM that assigns multiple meanings for those words, and performs the operations above on the meaning itself. In other words the LLM would actually understand you, not just chain words.
Damn, that’s sad. Thank you for the info.