Re: Help building Pen.el (GPT for emacs)

[Shane Mulligan <mullikine@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3939 bytes --]

This is why the technology is a bit like a
personal Google search, Stackoverflow, which
you can store offline because it's an index of the internet that is capable
of reconstruction.

But it's not limited to code generation. Codex
is nothing. Emacs + GPT would carve a large
piece out of M$.

Codex is a model trained for the purpose of
generating code, but GPT models will become
abundant for all tasks, including image and
audio synthesis and understanding.

Emacs is a complete operating system.
VSCode is geared towards programming.

Emacs can do infinitely more things with GPT
than VSCode can because it's holistic.

Even the 'eliza' in emacs can pass the turing
test with GPT. GPT can run sequences of commands in emacs to automate
entire workflows with natural language.

But the future is in collaborative GPT.

The basis/base truth would become versions of
LMs or ontologies.

Right now that's EleutherAI.

Shane Mulligan

How to contact me:
🇦🇺 00 61 421 641 250
🇳🇿 00 64 21 1462 759 <+64-21-1462-759>
mullikine@gmail.com


On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 2:10 PM Shane Mulligan <mullikine@gmail.com> wrote:

> It's a bit like whitewashing because it's
> reconstructing generatively by finding
> artificial/contrived associations between
> different works that the author had not
> intended but may have been part of their
> inspiration inspiration, and it compresses the
> information based on these assocations.
>
> It's a bit like running a lossy 'zip' on the
> internet and then decompressing
> probabilistically.
>
> When run deterministically (set the temperature of GPT to 0), you may
> actually
> see 'snippets' from various places, every time, with the same input
> generating
> the same snippets.
>
> So the source material is important.
>
> What GitHub did was very, very bad but they
> did it anyway.
>
> That doesn't mean GPT is bad, it just means
> they zipped up content they should not have
> and created this language 'index' or ('codex'
> is what they call it).
>
> What they really should do, if they are honest
> people, is train the model on subsets of
> GitHub code by separate licence and release
> the models with the same license.
>
> Shane Mulligan
>
> How to contact me:
> 🇦🇺 00 61 421 641 250
> 🇳🇿 00 64 21 1462 759 <+64-21-1462-759>
> mullikine@gmail.com
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 1:14 PM Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
>> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
>> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
>>
>>   > > That's not what happens with these services: they don't _copy_ code
>>   > > from other software (that won't work, because the probability of the
>>   > > variables being called by other names is 100%, and thus such code,
>> if
>>   > > pasted into your program, will not compile).  What they do, they
>>   > > extract ideas and algorithms from those other places, and express
>> them
>>   > > in terms of your variables and your data types.  So licenses are not
>>   > > relevant here.
>>
>>   > According to online reviews chunks of code is copied even verbatim and
>>   > people find from where. Even if modified, it still requires licensing
>>   > compliance.
>>
>> From what I have read, it seems that the behavior of copilot runs on a
>> spectrum from the first description to the second description.  I
>> expect that in many cases, nothing copyrightable has been copied, but
>> in some cases copilot does copy a substantial amount from a
>> copyrighted work.
>>
>> --
>> Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
>> Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
>> Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
>> Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)
>>
>>
>>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 7947 bytes --]