Yes? I acknowledged that in my original comment.
As it turns out, just declaring everything fine now doesn’t actually address the disparities of wealth and power when you have had much worse laws in place for much longer.
Happy St Patrick’s Day! In Ireland we burned the mansion houses of English landlords after independence. I’m not going to judge non-white South Africans for enforcing a fucking minority shareholder policy.
Sure. We can also change a single variable and have him sell 30% of it. And now he can be an apartheid nepo-baby and still run a telecommunications company in the nation his father helped to devastate.
What’s your point?
So he can still own it as a white man so long as he allows 30% to be owned by someone black, Cape Malay, Indian, San, KhoiKhoi or ‘coloured’, or indeed many people fitting any of those.
Not because he “isn’t black”.
Lots of countries have rules about local ownership; eg in Thailand businesses and properties have to be 51% owned by a Thai person. Of course the difference here is that for centuries the rules were increasingly enforced to treat certain races as foreigners, to the point of quite literally trying to declare parts of itself independent ie foreign. This creates a weird scenario after the fall of apartheid that is definitely uncomfortable to read but how do you undo centuries of this with carrot instead of stick when it’s people like Musk and Peter Thiel?
Wet market is weirdly interpreted by most in the west as meaning literally wet and inheritently unsanitary. One guy I talked to thought it meant the floating markets like the tourist trap in Bangkok.
A wet market is just the opposite of a dry market - food, drink, fresh goods. A “dry market” is clothes, furniture, devices.
There are unsanitary wet markets, but there are unsanitary Walmarts and Tescos. The western response to demand all wet markets be shut was just pure ignorance and prejudice.
I’m locked out of the Wired article, but if it’s the discourse I remember, then it’s arguing against Italy as the source rather than arguing for Wuhan specifically as the source.
Finding waste water samples from Italy doesn’t prove it came from there. It does disprove the idea that it originated from someone dropping a beaker or eating a bat on a particular street in Wuhan 3 months later.
If it helps, the (main) lab leak theory was conclusively disproven back in 2020 when waste water samples from Italy in September 2019 to December 2019 showed the presence of natural precursors to Covid-19, with signatures indistinguishable from “the” Covid. Lots of people were reporting a strong ‘flu-like’ bout of illness at Christmas 2019. The idea that it leaked from a lab in Wuham in December 2019 makes no sense. Neither does wet markets and bat soup by the way - that was just good old racism.
A troublesome but mundane coronavirus of the sort that millions every year dismissed as a cold had a slight mutation and turned deadly and prolific. I think the knowledge that this can happen at any time scares people far more than the lovely little idea of it coming out of a test tube so we can blame a person or a race or a government for it, direct anger at a tangible foe rather than the fragility of biological life.
Are you under the impression that what you quoted is a long or unclear text?
If third parties means AWS, then every website you’ve accessed this year shares your data with third parties. This is why the GDPR exists.
I’m always confused when people are surprised by something like an account sync meaning that the operators have to store your data
Makes me wonder if they understand how Lemmy works…
Required for promotion. OP has been demonstrating quite clearly that he isn’t ready for that.
these days
(Comment has time traveled 80 years)
Again, by this criteria the comments section of a Fox News article is a social media platform. There has to be some form of intent. You could use PasteBin to have a conversation, that wouldn’t make it a messaging application.
No, because Lemmy isn’t social media. It’s a link aggregator.
Social media requires you to know who the other people are, or at least that the identity and personality of the other people posting matters to what you consume. Apart from one or two attention-seeking exceptions, I almost never notice who posted something.
In fact, Lemmy being a Reddit clone, you may remember Reddit stirring controversy for years as they did try to become social media - adding avatars, followers functions, chat groups, etc.; none of which really suit the platform or its audience. Perhaps as the audience has changed they’ve gotten what they wanted.
If “social media” is just the ability to comment anonymously on Internet content and argue with strangers, then the guest book on my Geocities soccer page was social media.
It’s certainly better than "Open"AI being completely closed and secretive with their models. But as people have discovered in the last 24 hours, DeepSeek is pretty strongly trained to be protective of the Chinese government policy on, uh, truth. If this was a truly Open Source model, someone could “fork” it and remake it without those limitations. That’s the spirit of “Open Source” even if the actual term “source” is a bit misapplied here.
As it is, without the original training data, an attempt to remake the model would have the issues DeepSeek themselves had with their “zero” release where it would frequently respond in a gibberish mix of English, Mandarin and programming code. They had to supply specific data to make it not do this, which we don’t have access to.
A model isn’t an application. It doesn’t have source code. Any more than an image or a movie has source code to be “open”. That’s why OSI’s definition of an “open source” model is controversial in itself.
I know how LoRA works thanks. You still need the original model to use a LoRA. As mentioned, adding open stuff to closed stuff doesn’t make it open - that’s a principle applicable to pretty much anything software related.
You could use their training method on another dataset, but you’d be creating your own model at that point. You also wouldn’t get the same results - you can read in their article that their “zero” version would have made this possible but they found that it would often produce a gibberish mix of English, Mandarin and code. For R1 they adapted their pure “we’ll only give it feedback” efficiency training method to starting with a base dataset before feeding it more, a compromise to their plan but necessary and with the right dataset - great! It eliminated the gibberish.
Without that specific dataset - and this is what makes them a company not a research paper - you cannot recreate DeepSeek yourself (which would be open source) and you can’t guarantee that you would get anything near the same results (in which case why even relate it to thid model anymore). That’s why those are both important to the OSI who define Open Source in all regards as the principle of having all the information you need to recreate the software or asset locally from scratch. If it were truly Open Source by the way, that wouldn’t be the disaster you think it would be as then OpenAI could just literally use it themselves. Or not - that’s the difference between Open and Free I alluded to. It’s perfectly possible for something to be Open Source and require a license and a fee.
Anyway, it does sound like an exciting new model and I can’t wait to make it write smut.
I understand it completely in so much that it’s nonsensically irrelevant - the model is what you’re calling open source, and the model is not open source because the data set not published or recreateable. They can open source any training code they want - I genuinely haven’t even checked - but the model is not open source. Which is my point from about 20 comments ago. Unless you disagree with the OSI’s definition which is a valid and interesting opinion. If that’s the case you could have just said so. OSI are just of dudes. They have plenty of critics in the Free/Open communities. Hey they’re probably American too if you want to throw in some downfall of The West classic hits too!
If a troll is “not letting you pretend you have a clue what you’re talking about because you managed to get ollama to run a model locally and think it’s neat”, cool. Owning that. You could also just try owning that you think its neat. It is. It’s not an open source model though. You can run Meta’s model with the same level of privacy (offline) and with the same level of ability to adapt or recreate it (you can’t, you don’t have the full data set or steps to recreate it).
I take more than a minute on my replies Autocorrect Disaster. You asked for information and I treat your request as genuine because it just leads to more hilarity like you describing a model as “code”.
You’ve combined the two things together and said they are worse than one on its own. Duh.
The original poster is talking about the vast majority of kids today who do in fact get a decent sex education and if they see/hear their parents going at it, the ‘trauma’ is in seeing them in an unexpected context, not thinking Dad is beating mom.