There are very few recently launched pure open source projects these days (most are at least running donation-ware models or funded by corporate backers), none in the AI space that I'm aware of.

Take a closer look at the history of how they've been running things pretty much since the beginning. Even though they give away a lot of code under open source licenses (most of it they have to), to me it's always looked like they have run the project as if building a business out of it was the priority. I'm sure their recent IPO will result in much more openness... that's usually how things go, right? Nothing wrong with that, just don't be fooled into thinking they're something they're not.

I didn't down vote but I'll take a shot: A valid reason to consider the question is to determine to what degree the model was steered or filtered during training. This goes to can you trust its output beyond the obvious other limitations of the model such as hallucinations etc. It's useful to know if you are getting responses based just on the training data or if you have injected opinions to contend with.

I don't think your take is incorrect. I give it a try from time to time and it's always been inferior to other offerings for me every time I've tested it. Which I find a bit strange as NotebookLM (until recently) had been great to use. Whatever... there are plenty of other good options out there.

Having watched some of his streams on the topic, I think you've captured it well. He's basically saying he's done wasting time on AMD unless/until they get serious. It's not so much that he wants free hardware from them, rather he wants to see them put some skin in the game as they basically blew him off the last time he tried to engage with them.

It was implied by the phrase 'transformed the ways everyone used computers'. True, to younger computer users MacWrite would be the most familiar of the three. However, in terms of total unit sales and percentage of users for their day, MacWrite was practically rounding error in the word processor market. It was WordStar and then WordPerfect that dominated (and therefore 'transformed...') until the early/mid-90's when MS Word took over.

Maybe you've had a different experience with GPU drivers on ARM for Linux than most of the rest of us? (i.e. it's the fact that nVidia actually has Linux support on ARM that is the real appeal)

I tend to agree. Pat seemed to be trying to take a middle ground approach: split the company in two, but not really giving up hope that Intel would regain x86 leadership and that somehow things were still going to be OK on that front. The reality is that even if Intel retakes x86 leadership, x86 isn't what it once was and is unlikely to command the premium it once did except in niche legacy applications. If you give up hope for a return to the glory days, there's some radical restructuring left to do which includes cutting most of the middle, and some vertical layers, out of Intel.

What's your rush, sonny? You say 'not anytime soon' but then you say 'next 10 years'. In the world of GNU software, to say 'glacial pace' is basically asking 'what's your hurry?' Fine wine, fine wine... give it at least 30-40 years...

I think it absolutely was. Even 50+ years ago there was far more competition in any number of industries and investors looking at a particular widget maker could compare numerous companies and analyze the operations and strategy of each before picking which one(s) to invest in. Today we assume EMH when competition has become increasingly rare... so everyone from consumers to investors have fewer options yet somehow efficiency is supposed to exist.

Today most just pile into the megacaps and generally assume 'these guys are the biggest... they must be the best.' Sure, there's a small window of competition in the VC world where money piles into non-public companies for a few years before a winner is selected (often having nothing to do with having the best product/service or even being the most efficient or profitable... it's all about who scaled to the finish line the fastest) and either becomes the 800lb gorilla or gets gobbled up by one.

I ran it through Perplexity Pro which gave a very different and detailed answer with this closing note: "It's worth noting that not all places named "Hamilton" are necessarily named after Alexander Hamilton. For example, Hamilton, Ontario in Canada is named after George Hamilton, a Canadian merchant. Similarly, Hamilton in Scotland and New Zealand are named after different individuals."

Many of the LLM powered engines seem to be requiring a login these days. Just set up a burner gmail account to sign up for them (see, Google's still good for something ;-)

Did you try any of your queries using Perplexity Pro? (even at the free tier they give you a few 'Pro' queries a day) While it's still far from perfect, the Pro answers are generally higher quality than the free ones.

I'm finding several of the LLM's that can cite sources, including Perplexity, are more useful to me than Google for search these days. The notable exception is Gemini which has been quite bad in my experience compared to the other options.

The thinking is that the trajectory of LLM's will get them an AI flywheel where they can pump money in and get unlimited amounts of intelligence either augmenting or replacing human labor for pennies on the dollar. The business 'thought leaders' on this view it as a largely zero-sum game: get there first or watch your business die as someone else beats you to it.

This has a very late-90's vibe and is quite entertaining to watch.

Not so complex as to prevent this from existing: https://github.com/YosysHQ (if you have a supported device, these tools work quite well)

The limiting factor is that to support a given device it has to be reverse engineered since FPGA vendors don't want to provide the necessary details... that's the main issue.