If only someone would just bump up the size of the address space, so that there would be enough to go around again.
I mean, it's kinda like Y2K, isn't it? We're stuck with this old addressing scheme that chose 32 bits per address back when that was a lot for any computer to comfortably handle. But today if we used up twice.. no, even four times as many bits no PC would bat an eyelash and the increase in address space would be truly exponential.
It's just a shame that so much built infrastructure expects the current addressing system that it would probably take a life time to phase out. Plus that if anyone tried to rebuild it from scratch they would probably forget to make it backwards compatible, and also change so many things about it that it becomes a nightmare for anyone to try to implement. It's like trying to pass a new law and it gets infected by death-by-a-thousand-riders as a prerequisite to passing. :'(
How on earth are you going to move the needle on "honesty or effort put forth by an LLM" at the logit-choosing stage, though?
To me that's like inferring that you can keep a GPS system from choosing suboptimal cross-country routes by affixing a camera to the grill of the car with sufficient visibility to examine the next fifty feet of pavement.
> There are quite a few machines connected to the internet right now with no owner. Boxes forgotten over time and power consumption not enough to matter.
They are on somebody's land, and unless they run completely off of solar or turbine then they are still drawing someone's electricity. Their access to the internet also must be mediated through a SIM card or a wire to someone's network. With no dispute from other possible owners, the owner of the related land, electricity, and network access (far and away these will all be the same party) is the owner of the internet-connected device.
reply