

deleted by creator


deleted by creator


Found their Github. Looks like it’s a custom Linux kernel…? I dunno, it’s really hard to tell directly; I’m inferring from context clues (like tagging Raspberry Pi, mentioning the open Nvidia kernel modules, etc.).


So to be clear, these are all papers before the peer review process?


I agree, and I don’t even particularly like the foundational use of AI here. Education should be accessible to all, and it would be cool to see this become a free tool for which OP doesn’t even need AI anymore, because there’s enough contributors and experts.


This software isn’t free. It has a cost. Did you think using the tools provided by billionaires was a gift from them?
Also, it’s hilarious that you think I’m bullying OP. Where in my original comment did I say, “No, don’t use this”? I intentionally skipped over my ethical concerns, because OP is likely going to use it anyway.
They’re providing educational content. You can’t just replace the knowledge of experts creating and checking lesson material with AI and hope for the best; that’s how you end up teaching people wrong information.
Y’all pro-AI goobers are so lost in the sauce, you can’t even take a critique.


$13/mo can be a lot for people, that’s true. There’s certainly a subset where they simply don’t have that extra. I suspect that subset is fewer than people might imagine, but I honestly would rather people have accessible education than not.
For the second part, I think it’s a hard ask for experts to contribute in that way, but hey, people spend their hobby time working on Linux and other OSS, so who knows?
I also have ethical issues with the use of Claude itself (as well as other tools/platforms provided by billionaires), but I think that’s beyond the scope of your original questions.
There are other ML models made from scratch by universities and experts which aren’t beholden to shareholders (and might not be accessible by the public, yet), so if you are determined to continue using AI in this way, keep an eye out for potentially better alternatives.


There’s petabytes of data there dude
The fact that you think that AI has a database of information from which it pulls demonstrates that you have no idea how it works. And you think we’re the blind ones lmao


Ah, right. Because I secretly love it and use it all the time, as evidenced by your very scientific source, “Trust me, bro.” What a tired and boring Reddit cliché.


It’s weird that people are so positive towards AI, even when it’s used to generate something with no understanding of the material. It’s now become a disease to be accepting of anything AI, even if it uses the very thing our oppressors want us to use.


Notice that I didn’t say that $160 wasn’t a lot for people. I said it was a steal for the amount of educational content.


First off: $160 a year for education (about $13 a month) is a steal. I’m not sure why this needs to exist.
Second: ignoring the ethical issues with using Claude so glibly, who is reviewing these lessons for accuracy? Who is making new lessons? Part of Brilliant’s deal is having actual subject experts who are at least reviewing the lessons. No AI model is a replacement for that expertise. You can’t crowdsource that expertise ad hoc, either (the people who use it are the ones learning from it, after all).
Are you just going to hope Claude can clone some facsimile forever?


It’s preaching to the choir here, but the story being run in Wired means a bunch of privileged normies who are bafflingly still unaware of how bad ICE is might be exposed to how bad ICE is.


Don’t threaten me with a good time


Well, then y’all can enjoy your loss of privacy. I’m not telling you what to do, but that is the consequence of using their products.


No. Meta is a data harvesting company. Any points of data you give them is bad, privacy-wise.
And don’t believe the claptrap that WhatsApp is “safe” from prying eyes or truly E2EE. Meta is not and has never been trustworthy, and they have been caught lying on countless occasions.
Use their products at your own peril.


The YouTube comment he posted is certainly problematic at best:
I have my own idea of what a man or a woman is that I am going to guess is different from the politician in question. That being said, bringing this shit up all the time is absolutely counterproductive and useless. Especially when it has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Imagine if I was talking to a politician who weighed 400 pounds and agreed with me on an issue that mattered. And let’s say that person did not like being referred to as fat because they do not think they are overweight. Would it be incumbent upon me to point out that they are fat? What benefit does that do for me? If this person is trying to help me not get screwed over by companies that lie and cheat to get laws passed in their favor so they can rob us blind, it’s not really important in that moment that I point out that that person is in fact obese. What their personal belief of “obesity” is is a useless discussion that has nothing to do with my own actions and identity.
What people choose to do in their own homes or what they choose to call themselves is their business and is not something I care to discuss.
What matters more than that to me is what people tell me I am not allowed to do in my own home with the products that I bought and paid for. That is an issue that is much more important to me.
…there’s no source included for the accusation that he “regularly posts” on Kiwi Farms. Did he mention it in a video? Was it another YouTube comment? Something posted on his Discord? What’s the source of the username connection? We don’t need a link to the Kiwi Farms user, we just need the compelling evidence that the user larossmann is indeed him.
I don’t mind taking him to task over his YouTube comment, but I need more than “trust me, bro” on the other one.


Well fuck
How can you talk? You’re a sandwich! Clearly these bugs run deeper than we thought…