I understand your concerns and I too have my concerns which is why the goal is not to try to replace the usage of the Quran, scholars or our own need to seek knowledge. We can't shy away from the use of new technology but we should also be cautious. I cite references that are used for the search context and those are visible. Essentially one should not offload their reasoning to a machine but something that has the ability to search a knowledge base and offer summarisation is a valuable tool. Again not a replacement for scholars or students it knowledge. But something to consider.
Yea I mean they are financially doing better than any group of companies at any time in human history, kind of like the exact opposite of this downhill claim
Even with Googles monopoly legal issues, they are more valuable than ever.
Sure, why don't I pop down to the spouse shop and pick one out from their extensive range?
There are almost no marriageable women around these days. Having $ does make getting laid very easy, but I'm not interested in that. Unfortunately it doesn't help at all in finding one of the good ones (perhaps it makes it even harder).
If I guess his views correctly and mix them with mine: women with an exemplary life hygiene - maintaining a near perfect body, no addiction or unhealthy obsession of any sort (tobacco, alcohol, drugs, TV, social medias, smartphones, travels, pets, etc...), chaste compared to nowadays' standard libertinage - intelligent and cultured (and I'm not talking about pop culture).
> When there is such a rich database of manual pages and q/a about these tools, I tend to blame the user rather than the tool when I hear it called "too complex".
Strong disagree. The example they gave about ffmpeg is a great example. Let's say I'm a casual ffmpeg user that wants to wrangle some videos one way or another.
I don't have the time to dig through ffmpeg's manual with tons of different options and terms that I don't understand just to figure out, as a trivial example, how to convert an mp4 to an mp3 while maintaining the best quality possible. I have 0 interest in learning about media formats, codecs, etc. I just want the result. This is not unreasonable.
With ChatGPT/Claude/etc, this is an even more trivial task. Nothing wrong with that. I'm willing to take the (minimal) risk of running an ffmpeg command while taking a common sense glance at it. It won't destroy my existing file. Or I'll run it on a copy if I'm being paranoid. I'm not dumb enough to destroy my machine or get some malware by running an unfamiliar ffmpeg command I copy pasted.
My #1 usage for LLMs is bash/zsh commands. Shell syntax is miserable to say the least.
maybe there is a time offset between the readings from the two sources. Other factor could be the quality of the sensor itself or how google manage to get that data.
I think things generally start off as experiments in first world countries then trickle down eventually to third world countries. That's just the reality. 20 years ago not everything could be digitized because internet/smartphone access isn't widespread, but now more or less every single person on the planet has some sort of internet access. Things change eventually, they gotta start somewhere.
