| ▲ | jack_pp 7 hours ago | |
this is a thread about reverse engineering, to my knowledge small parameter LLMs are not going to give you much help with this. who cares about novelty LLMs? > We know with populations of a certain size, any barrier is going to cause people to drop off but the population size of people who will self host is not large. > The more technical it feels, the more impenetrable it feels you have to be inherently technical to even consider the option to run locally no matter how easy. what would a non technical person even use a local LLM for, that they wouldn't want to do with CGPT or ANT? also, even considering reverse engineering any software at all requires technical knowledge. 99% of lay people don't even know it's an option let alone start vibe coding a RE on a local LLM | ||
| ▲ | Forgeties79 7 hours ago | parent [-] | |
When has lack of domain knowledge stopped people when it comes to LLM’s? Besides I know I often learn how to do things by just throwing myself at it and brute forcing it until I start to gain understanding. A lot of us learn by doing, even if it’s something we have no business doing in the first place. A lot of people also work on projects because they want people to use it. If the number of people utilizing different peoples takes on models drops, than people are going to lose interest in making them for other people. We all like to point to the altruism of the open source world, but nobody likes to release something only for no people to use it. That’s a very natural feeling that leads to people not releasing things because they’re too niche and such. Anyway I’m just moving on. I don’t understand how I’m having to defend “increased barriers to entry dissuades people from participation and creation.” Some of y’all don’t think it’s a big deal or it’s somehow not applicable, but I can’t say I agree | ||