It’s not grammatically wrong though. It’s a soft ordering constraint. It’s not a hard syntax rule.
If you’re being taught in a high-level linguistics class that it’s a hard rule, then that class is dog s***.
I’ve listened to enough syntacticians ramble about this topic for a life time.
It’s because of the adjective order. You grow up hearing everyone else use the same common adjective order. In this case it should be size shape color than condition.
Overall it would be opinion size, age shape, color, origin material purpose.
Because everyone uses that same adjective order as a child. You picked up on that so consciously and then adopted that style. There’s nothing that actually prevents you from mixing that up. There’s no rule or some sort of quirk of English that will break if you change that order.
You’re just not used to any other way so it sounds weird.
But changing that order won’t create any sort of confusion or loss of understanding. It’ll just make you have to actively think about something thus slowing you down. We’re doing it the way that everyone does it subconsciously is faster because you don’t have to actively think of it.
So by default you will always choose the fastest way to communicate. Because that’s going to require the least amount of thought for both yourself and the other party.
But again there is no reason you can’t change it.
The only real issue I can think of is if you do change it on purpose it would create an emphasis because you’re breaking a normality. Cuz people just subconsciously assume you go from subjective to objective when it comes to adjectives.
And changes to the standard stand out and thus create points of interest. But again, even that is still not a hard syntax rule.
English doesn’t really have a lot of hard rules. You can f*** with it real hard and it won’t break. Though you may sound very funny!.
Other then needing to capitalize the. The wrapped, round, red, big box. Is perfectly fine tho?
Stylistically it’s abnormal so it sounds funny, but grammar wise it’s perfectly fine. It’s just people are use to a common hierarchy adjectives, typically size then shape then color than condition in this case. So anything else sounds weird. But again, that’s entirely just a style choice.
English is way fucking more flexible then people give think. Style helps make things easier to understand quicker because you have to think about it less. But no information is lost and no confusion is created thus it’s fine objectively speaking.
Just because they are single doesn’t mean they don’t understand what they are talking about. Just like being in one doesn’t mean they understand anything either.
I’ve known more people in my life in a relationship that couldn’t give fucking anything remotely close to healthy advice, then single people that could give you the best advice you could want.
There are more codependent people who chase a relationship no matter how toxic or unhealthy they are. Then there are actually sane, reasonable people who have their shit figured out either single or in a relationship.
At least with hentai it’s just drawings. Fucked up, but it’s a god damn world of difference from real life shit being posted.
There’s bad, and then there’s absolutely fucking vile
That’s… Not how any of that works?! You can be anti chat bot llm, anti anti ai mob hater, and pro llm science and research bot.
There’s more to the tech then just the chat bots the anti ai mob dipshits all seem to think of when llms come up.
It would also have been simple to not use any technology ever that has had controversy around it
But unless you are actively a lodite hermit living in the woods with no connection to the world. In which case your opinion on the topic doesn’t really matter in the grand scheme of things since clearly you already have a unhealthy relationship with reality.
Learning to have a healthy relationship with new tech is how to actually deal with shit. Not ignoring it forever as if pandoras box wasn’t open.
It’s not going anywhere, even if the bubble pops and all of it dies. Local models will only become more and more common, the tech will only become easier and easier to run and more efficient and effective.
Even if it devolves into a specialist tool for research and science only. That still is going to be something you will have to come to grips with.
The tech is far far more than just chat bots.
Personally I’ve found that ai is fantastic at pulling files off my phone cause I’m a lazy shit… Iv trained it so that when I tell it “do the thing” it pulls all the pictures off my phone and backs them up.
It’s fun, whimsical, and while I could do it a host of other ways. This is just more fun.
Which is honestly kinda what I see as one of the better use cases for local models. Sure you could do the same thing with a script, or by hand.
But it’s not as /fun/ as having a little robot butler that slings one liners from various cartoons that you don’t have to prepick as it enacts your will.
The majority of human history at all levels of science, philosophy, and mathematics. The best you could ever hope for was 95%. Hell you were lucky to break 90% accuracy.
Because the only people you could ask questions was the people in the room with you right then and there or the people you could actively physically go ask.
If you were extremely lucky you could write to someone who MIGHT know more. Or may there’s a book about it that someone knows exists.
95% can and frequently is very much over kill for almost everything anyone will need for their day to day life for random trivia or even most important work.
Very few fields need more than that, and few still is it a matter of life or death.
The part that people fuck up is not being open to learning more and being corrected.
The best way I’ve seen it put is that ai is the perfected form of the wisdom of the masses. It’s 90% right 90% of the time. But the most important part is the last 10%.
90% is good enough for most things in your day to day life that have no consequences. But it’s like people have forgotten what it was like before smart phones.
Back when your best chance of a good answer was asking who ever was in hear shot if they knew and just accepting that as good enough. You never treated it as fact just as the best answer your going to get at the moment.
For anything important you would go to the damn library.
Well I’m not one to ick your yum… That’s an ick bug dawg. Damn
I mean to be fair. They announced a Linux client like a decade ago. So we’ll see if this is any more accurate than the last time.
Good news! They announced it like 10 years ago. It’ll be ready in another 10
Still ass.
Finding the problems alone can be a hell of a useful tool. Doubly so when you have decades of tech debt and a mess of a project.
It’s also proving the point that a lot of people hate to admit is right. That if you just flag every bug in vulnerability out to everyone everywhere immediately and you don’t hide it behind bureaucracy in Goodwill.
Then it actually forces people to fix things. Cuz you either fix things or you go under.
Companies have gotten so used to scaring and threatening people into hiding vulnerabilities for so long that it’s become normalized. It lets bad practices and insecurities flourish and multiply.
You either fix your s*** or you don’t have problems in the first place. Those are your two options now. No more of this b******* hiding.
No, win 11 development started before the slopification but at this point it does have a lot of ai work in it.
So you do still need to be rather specific to what parts your talking about.
Yep and even 1000 engineers with 10 years of time is still going to be wrong a hell of a lot. But that doesn’t matter. Even a tiny fraction of the bugs found being being real is enough to over load and flood out most projects.
Llms don’t have to be 100% right, even at 10% right there’s still too many bugs to fix. Decades of tech debt is being called in. And ain’t no body is ready for it.
Your giving microshit too much credit. Windows is a house of cards held together with duct tape.
It’s gotten worse with slop, but it was never great to start with.
No they don’t. Only the shitty ones do.
We can’t believe what it does not, or six agos what it does then. The shit is moving faster then literally anyone really seems to understand.
The avg person that makes fun of ai, seems to still think they have the same problems they had 2-3 years. Because the cheap free models they have access to are extremely out of date, or very limited.
The actual real deal big boy models are so far beyond what your avg even extremely technical user understands. Unless you are actively watching following and using the models you just flat out have no clue just how fast this shit is sprinting.
It’s got plenty of problems and the growth is not across every aspect of it equally. So it’s really easy to point and laugh at a particular point it’s struggling with while it skips ahead in other regards.
It’s wild. The progress is just as unsustainable as the profits are bad. As long as that progress keeps sprinting the bad profits flat out don’t matter.
IT WILL hit critical mass to replace your avg idiot long before the profit problem really hits at this rate.
The bigger problem is that even if it replaces people that profit problem doesn’t go away. So it will just hit AFTER people are replaced. And that’s a even worse outcome then replacing people.
We NEED the bubble to pop before that point and the industry recalibrates to a sustainable model.
Else we will have mass job loss promptly followed by a massive bubble popping and economy collapse AND companies flopping and job opportunity losses as places closing shop so there won’t even be jobs to back to.
It could get REALLY fucking bad.