(no title)
cjfd
|
1 day ago
The article talks about 'software development will be democratized' but the current LLM hype is quite the opposite. The LLMs are owned by large companies and are quite impossible to train by any individual, if only because of energy costs. The situation where I am typing my code on my linux machine is much more democratic.
tkel|1 day ago
Democracy is about governance, not access.
A "democratized" LLM would be one in which its users collectively made decisions about how it was managed. Or if the companies that owned LLMs were ran democratically.
jasode|1 day ago
It can be about both meanings. The additional meanings of democratize to describe "more accessible" are documented in Oxford and Merriam-Webster dictionaries:
https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/dictionaries-thesaur...
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democratic#:~:tex...
foo42|1 day ago
tbrownaw|1 day ago
(Or alternatively, it's getting harder to stamp out "shadow IT" and all the risks and headaches it causes.)
Havoc|1 day ago
What you say about big tech is true at same time though. I worry about what happens when China takes the lead and no longer feels the need to do open models. First hints already showing - advance access to ds4 only for Chinese hardware makers
elzbardico|1 day ago
The problem was never access barriers, but the fact that people are too lazy to study even a 200-300 pages on something as simple as ruby on rails.
ares623|1 day ago
ldng|1 day ago
cyanydeez|1 day ago
xg15|1 day ago
Kinrany|1 day ago
YeGoblynQueenne|1 day ago
heliumtera|1 day ago