My new supervisor, the day I met him, was talking about how space data centers are a great idea (“because it’s so cold up there!”) and will be amazing when they’re online. That’s the moment I realized he was breathtakingly stupid. He may not believe in thermodynamics, but thermodynamics believes in him.
I guess I shouldn’t have expected much given that he has a degree in finance and has worked in consulting for 10 years.
EULAs are part of the reason I almost exclusively use FOSS or just spin my own software (if time permitting).
The first time I encountered one was as a small child (like 5 or 6) when I was trying to install some game. The EULA came up, and I started reading it. Of course, I only understood a fraction of the legalese, but seeing some clauses that seemed to a child supremely unfair, caused me to hit “Do Not Agree.” Who would agree to such non-sense without having a full understanding or seeing crazy stipulations? The window closed, and I couldn’t understand why, so I asked my parents. They said that although you should read and understand any agreement, EULAs were different because if you don’t agree, then you can’t use the software.
It’s crazy to me that even as a kid, I could see how one-sided EULAs were. These companies aren’t even hiding their malicious intent, and we as a society have just decided to go along with it. I’m part of the problem, too (much as I try not to be). There have certainly been times that I hit accept even knowing that the EULA was taking advantage of me in some way, but I needed to use the software.
Anyway, there’s not much of a point of writing all this. Companies’ EULAs screw us over, and there is little we can really do about it, especially if the software is necessary in some way.
Please read the citations. I’ve found Claude (and a slightly lesser extend GPT) to be right more often than not, but the leading LLMs do get things wrong with enough frequency that it’s worth checking.
Also, to be clear, I’m not fervently anti-LLM, but I do know how it works (as much as anyone who has read the academic literature). “Thinking” is at best a misnomer and at worst a marketing term. It’s just an ouroboros; the LLM more-or-less feeds its output back into itself to “check” it and “think.” It works surprisingly well, but it’s not actual thinking.
LLMs don’t. There are tools that can fetch new information and then gets fed into the model as more tokens, but that’s just a special case of what kescusay is saying about injecting text.