Yo whatup

  • 0 Posts
  • 168 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: September 28th, 2023

help-circle
  • It can. It depends on what changed. If both of you touch the same file in a conflicting way you’ll have to merge the commit with the conflict. If you don’t then it just auto magically works.

    For example if you have commits A - B - C with a branch A - D with D adding a brand new file you can trivially rebase (IE no need to merge) D onto C for a history of A - B - C - D

    The best part about rebasing imo is that you get to merge commit by commit. Using the previous example if there’s a conflict in commit B but nothing in C all you have to do is fix commit D to handle the changes B made, nothing else










  • If you truly believe that you fundamentally misunderstand the definition of that word or are being purposely disingenuous as you Ai brown nose folk tend to be. To pretend for a second you genuinely just don’t understand how to read LLMs, the most advanced “Ai” they are trying to sell everybody is as capable of reasoning as any compression algorithm, jpg, png, webp, zip, tar whatever you want. They cannot reason. They take some input and generate an output deterministically. The reason the output changes slightly is because they put random shit in there for complicated important reasons.

    Again to recap here LLMs and similar neural network “Ai” is as capable of reasoning as any other computer program you interact with knowingly or unknowingly, that being not at all. Your silly Wikipedia page is a very specific term “Reasoning System” which would include stuff like standard video game NPC Ai such as the zombies in Minecraft. I hope you aren’t stupid enough to say those are capable of reasoning


  • They can’t reason. LLMs, the tech all the latest and greatest still are, like GPT5 or whatever generate output by taking every previous token (simplified) and using them to generate the most likely next token. Thanks to their training this results in pretty good human looking language among other things like somewhat effective code output (thanks to sites like stack overflow being included in the training data).

    Generating images works essentially the same way but is more easily described as reverse jpg compression. You think I’m joking? No really they start out with static and then transform the static using a bunch of wave functions they came up with during training. LLMs and the image generation stuff is equally able to reason, that being not at all whatsoever










  • It’s not an assumption it’s just a matter of practical reality. If we’re at best a decade off from that point why pretend it could suddenly unexpectedly improve to the point it’s unrecognizable from its current state? LLMs are neat, scientists should keep working on them and if it weren’t for all the nonsense “Ai” hype we have currently I’d expect to see them used rarely but quite successfully as it would be getting used off of merit, not hype.