Definitely, the problem is that OpenAI has a non-commerical license that applies to any model trained on it. So Alpaca can not be used for anything other than research purposes legally.

We need a true open LLM to use to train other models legally

I mean, text-davinci-003 basically was chatgpt until recently, but sure

text-davinci-003

which is the model underlying chatgpt 3

>The researchers spent just $600 to get it working

This part is a little deceptive. Alpaca is just a modification of the Meta LLAMA models. It cost $600 for Stanford to (with questionable legality) use ChatGPT to modify the LLAMA models. It cost Meta thousands to train the LLAMA models though.

Hdd is still used as slow cheap storage. If ssds actually get as cheap as hdds then yeah they'll go extinct

A usb stick is a thing that exists

USB stick is improved physical media over blu ray. Physical media will probably never come back. Unless you count the ssds that you store your data on

Uhh, I would pick a different topic tbh. Blockchain is just a distributed database and ledger. It's really not that interesting or important, and typically a centralized database is the better choice for almost all problems.

>A bag of flour and liter of cooking oil made in a bioreactor will represent a much more significant revolution than tomatoes and berries grown in vertical farms.

I came here to say this.

Vertical farms work great for mid-sized crops (strawberries or tomatoes), but not small (like wheat/corn) or large (like almond trees or apple trees). But bioreactors are going to be in serious play using bacteria to grow food in vats (yum, who doesn't want vat flour and vat oil? lol we'll get used to it)

Great for mid-sized crops (raspberries, tomatoes, etc.)

Terrible for very small crops (wheat, corn) or very large crops (almond trees)

So utility, but limited utility

Nuclear weapons are still quite possibly the great filter. We just haven't hit the tipping point yet if that is the case

In simple terms, a quantum computer can simultaneously calculate every possibility in a set of arbitrary size, whereas a classical computer would have to calculate each possibility separately.

So for small operations that's not so helpful, but for massive ones it would be revolutionary. For example, consider calculating the 3d shape of a molecule with hundreds of atoms, or the interaction of several molecules with dozens of atoms. It is impractical to do this kind of calculation with the proper math due to the number of calculations/possibilities/interactions. Right now we use a 'rough' kind of calculation that is close enough but not close enough for many fields like medicine creation and protein folding. QC would make that task easy. It would also make AI training dramatically easier. Etc.

Oh definitely - QC is basically a dream for now. The real computing advancements in the next decade will come from Graphene

QM is relatively straightforward. The concept is this: particles don't actually have a position or spin or charge or mass or velocity. Instead there are different probabilities that we will observe a spin/charge/mass/velocity at various positions. There are 'dense' areas of probability where there is high likelihood to observe the particle/property and there are 'light' areas of probability where there is low likelihood to observe the particle property. You can think of these 'dense' and 'light' regions as crests and troughs of a wave. And just like water waves can interfere with each other (a big crest and a big trough cancel out in water, etc), so to can probability waves. As a result, instead of interacting 'classically' as objects, the quantum observations we make interact as waves of probability that can interact with each other like waves, resulting in all kinds of complex interference.

If that makes sense?

QM is relatively straightforward. The concept is this: particles don't actually have a position or spin or charge or mass or velocity. Instead there are different probabilities that we will observe a spin/charge/mass/velocity at various positions. There are 'dense' areas of probability where there is high likelihood to observe the particle/property and there are 'light' areas of probability where there is low likelihood to observe the particle property. You can think of these 'dense' and 'light' regions as crests and troughs of a wave. And just like water waves can interfere with each other (a big crest and a big trough cancel out in water, etc), so to can probability waves. As a result, instead of interacting 'classically' as objects, the quantum observations we make interact as waves of probability that can interact with each other like waves, resulting in all kinds of complex interference.

If that makes sense?

Wouldn't be long before an AI tool was developed to create a file with those attributes