Would they do what they do if they had zero dollars?

> Would they do what they do if they had zero dollars?

No, probably not. Isn't it a shame we live in a world where we have the technology to automate all meaningful production, but people still need to justify their existence through often meaningless labor?

That said, I know artists that make the bare minimum to survive, on purpose, so they have more time to focus on art.

Yes, as long as they have enough to survive, people generally have some free time. I know someone who's living paycheck to paycheck and they make music as a hobby. Obviously, if you have to work 16 hours a day to survive they wouldn't do it – or at least they wouldn't have the capacity to share it.

At least some of the promotion images on the site seem AI-generated: The image next to "Single-board computer" features a very wonky keyboard.

What do you mean? I see nothing wrong with the keyboard.

Well, there are three keys labeled "A," to start with...

Aimed at AAA studios.

Lots of em-dashes in this copy.

https://sabracrolleton.github.io/testing-framework There's this pretty in-depth comparison of testing frameworks, but I'm not sure if any of the frameworks there satisfy your specifications.

I'm really impressed by Factor. It has a lot of the niceties that I like about Common Lisp, like restarting on errors and the compiled-but-interactive development approach. On top of all of this the development environment is presented as a very cohesive package, including standardized project structuring styles, a documentation system and a UI library.

The last time I tried to learn it I stopped because I found the concatenative syntax even harder to parse than s-exprs when any math was involved. I'm giving it another go now.

I suppose https://docs.factorcode.org/content/article-infix.html is actually the better link.

Thanks! I didn't know it was possible to use infix notation.

There's one more that restarted active development recently: JSCL https://github.com/jscl-project/jscl

Would you accept the argument that compiling is modifying the bytes in the memory space reserved for an executable?

I can edit the executable at the byte level if I so desire, and this is also what compilers do, but the developer would instead be modifying the source code to make changes to the program and then feed that through a compiler.

Similarly, I can edit the weights of a neural network myself (using any tool I want) but the developers of the network would be altering the training dataset and the training code to make changes instead.

The big difference that an Open Source license gives me is that regardless of the tool I use to make the edits, if I rewrite the bytes of the Linux kernel, I can freely release my version with the same license, but if I rewrite the bytes of Super Mario Odyssey and try to release the modified version, I'll soon be having a very fun time at the bankruptcy court.

I think the confusion for a lot of people comes from what they imagine compilation to be. In LLMs, the process is this (simplified):

define_architecture (what the operations are, and the order in which they're performed)

initialise_model(defined_arch) -> weights. Weights are "just" hardcoded values. Nothing more, nothing less.

The weights are the result of the arch, at "compile" time.

optimise_weights(weights, data) -> better_weights.

----

You can, should you wish, totally release a model after iitialisation. It would be a useless model, but, again, the license does not deal with that. You would have the rights to run, modify and release the model, even if it were a random model.

tl;dr; Licenses deal with what you can do with a model. You can run it, modify it, redistribute it. They do not deal with how you modify them (i.e. what data you use to arrive at the "optimal" hardcoded values). See also my other reply with a simplified code example.

I suppose 80% means you don't give them a 0 mark because the software says it's AI, you only do so if you have other evidence reinforcing the possibility.

no, you multiply their result by .8 to account for the "uncertainty"! /s

Firefox opens a new window when I press C-n. Is this a setting that you have to enable?

The op is probably on Mac where emacs movements use Ctrl but FF and other apps use Cmd key, so they always work as there’s no conflict.

Is there a way to enable such a mode on a Linux Desktop Environment, so most mnemonics use Super- instead of Ctrl- ?

Honestly being able to use emacs movements everywhere is one of the reasons I stay on MacOS.

For the first SAM model, you needed to encode the input image which took about 2 seconds (on a consumer GPU), but then any detection you did on the image was on the order of milliseconds. The blog post doesn't seem too clear on this, but I'm assuming the 30ms is for the encoder+100 runs of the detector.