Anything, everything. Basically supreme? Onion, mushroom, olive, pepperoni, ham, cherry tomato, whatever. Wouldn't really do pineapple with broccoli but pineapple has it's time and place.
For conservatives, hypocrisy is the point. It is a flex of power, to be the exception from their own bullshit. Its always "rules for thee but not for me". Their logic concludes with "but not me"
Uh, I mean no not cool. Hurting people because it hurts some you don't like, too, is basically their entire ideology. You're advocating for the exact same now.
Traitors would mean they were ever on your side. Welcome to capitalism, bud. They've always been on the side of maximum profit, like all other corporations.
Not watching a 15 minute video, just responding to your comment. For AMD hardware, Linux is great. Most games run with the same performance, many run even faster, than native Windows, despite needing a compatibility layer.
Windows is the biggest bottleneck on PCs. The Windows scheduler is so bad that they have to bypass it and automatically pin fullscreen and game processes to CPU cores in order to get acceptable performance. They also recently updated Windows 11 to max the CPU frequency multiplier while mouse input is detected, in order to solve performance problems with responsiveness.
Windows fans will point to benchmarks of UE5 games, which still run with marginally worse performance on Linux compared to Windows. I play several UE5 games on Linux and the performance meets my expectations. The difference is not noticeable unless you are watching a performance graph. Time will tell if further optimizations put Linux at the same or better performance as Windows with UE5 games, too, like it already is for other games.
Pretty much the only games that cannot be played on Linux are games that deliberately disallow server connections from Linux clients or games that use Windows-only anti-cheat software. Everything else runs with good or great performance. This is the current state of gaming on Linux.
Maybe the statistical approximate just coincidentally lined up with the actual solution?
Yes, right, and this can happen. I didn't say they are a bad approximation. LLMs may be the most advanced and sophisticated statistical models ever created (if there are other examples of statistical models that are more sophisticated, I would love to learn about them). But given what an LLM actually objectively is, a statistical model of the next token to follow from a sample of language, what other explanation could there be?
We need to keep in mind what the tools that we are working with actually are.
As a code generator, they can produce great results, especially simple stuff like generating a script or some function implementation. Once you get to software engineering tasks like designing system architecture and designing maintainable code, it starts to fall apart really fast. You end up doing all of the work for it in natural language and just using the LLM for a usecase that it is actually great for: translation, from detailed spec to code.
Especially because a statistical model of language has very limited valid usecases. Many tasks that people use LLM for do not make any sense and cannot be accomplished by a statistical model of language. It can only output a statistical approximate of what a solution to the task might look like, not an actual solution.
Anything, everything. Basically supreme? Onion, mushroom, olive, pepperoni, ham, cherry tomato, whatever. Wouldn't really do pineapple with broccoli but pineapple has it's time and place.