Why do people have such faith in "open source" models? There's nothing "open source" about them. No individuals have the ability to train such modules. They are just released by companies to commoditize the models of the competition.
If Mythos is the endgame, companies won't release open-weight equivalents, and no private individuals have the capital to train such models.
The open models cannot be taken away. Anyone with the right hardware can host these. Unlike the API/subscription services where you can be banned from, may have drastic price increases or reduction of their limits.
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
Not my experience at all. The (few) non-tech people I've talked to about phones soon getting batteries again like it. People believe the idea that non-removable batteries are a conspiracy by the phone companies to sell you more phones the same way cartels manipulated the lightbulb market (Phoebus cartel).
It was omitted because it is irrelevant. It doesn't matter which ally the US sells weapons to. If the Gazans attacked Luxembourg, Luxembourgers have the right to defend themselves (and win) too.
Yes. If you're a guest in a country and don't follow the law you should be deported. You don't need waste money putting them on trial (except for murder/rape/etc), just deport.
> "Master" didn't really make sense. It was supposed to mean one thing that controls another thing (the slave), but nothing ever works out that way in reality.
I really hate how people pretend to be stupid and not know that master means a lot of different things: "animal owner", "an expert", "a tradesman", "postgraduate degree", "original", and many others (including dated definitions). Wiktionary lists 21 definitions, only one of which is slave owner.
> Wiktionary lists 21 definitions, only one of which is slave owner.
It lists two which references "slave".
Definition 2 references slave owning, but that's irrelevant to the actual discussion here.
This thread is talking about definition 17:
> (engineering, computing) A device that is controlling other devices or is an authoritative source.
>
> Synonyms: coordinator, primary
> Antonyms: secondary, slave, worker
---------------------------
> I really hate how people pretend to be stupid and not know that master means a lot of different things
"Master" meaning different things is exactly the problem.
Even if we limit ourselves specifically to definition 17, it still means too many things. It's overloaded to the point that it doesn't accurately describe the systems where it's used.
Git has nothing to do with that (not that master-slave is wrong).
> master-slave metaphor is both technically and historically inaccurate
How can a metaphor be historically inaccurate? The whole point of a metaphor is that it's evocative, not real. A slave DB following what the master DB is doing is a good metaphor. Where is the historical inaccuracy there?
> it costs me nothing to change my vocabulary
Changing hard coded values costs a lot. I still have scripts which reference both `master` and `main`.
> especially if it is one less little speed bump to getting a new person excited about tech
And we've gotten to the main issue. This whole thing is about making white-knighting white Americans feel better about themselves. There was no outcry from black people saying they can't program until Git changes its terminology.
Not to mention that slavery has nothing to do with racism. This is just an American-centric view. Historically people enslaved their own kind. Getting slaves from other continents is a relative recent thing in the grand scheme of things.
>The nodeSelector and peerSelector for the route reflectors target the label `node-role.kubernetes.io/master`. In the 1.20 series, Kubernetes changed its terminology from “master” to “control-plane.” And in 1.24, they removed references to “master,” even from running clusters. This is the cause of our outage.
Master/slave is almost always misused anyway. Yes one database will do all the work(we will call that one master) and the other will sit around all day waiting to take over(we call that one the slave). me nodding. yep that is about how it worked. postgres is a little closer where the master process hangs around not doing much, only really there to receive new connections which it then gives to workers to process. And don't even get me started on how IDE drives misused the term, I don't mind the master/slave terminology but if used it should at least capture some of the dynamic of that relationship.
I never did understand what they felt was wrong about git master, there was no slave or even work involved. it was more like the master print of a video. you know the thing that "remasters" are made from.
You have to consider all the costs of employing someone, not just the direct compensation. Benefits, health insurance, taxes (eg employer payroll taxes), office space, equipment, various insurances, utilities, costs related to just having that person (eg HR) and so on. So even a $100k salary, which is pretty modest for a US-based engineer, the additional costs may well add another $50-100k.
If Mythos is the endgame, companies won't release open-weight equivalents, and no private individuals have the capital to train such models.
reply