Technology
News community around technology, social media platforms, information technology and governmental policy surrounding it.
What doesn't fit here?
The core of the story has to be technology focused.
- If article mentions "AI" in a sentence and then talks about business economics that doesn't make it tech news.
- Gaming is too many layers removed from technology. There are many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Transporation is too many layers removed from technology. EVs while use many cool technologies have many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Entertainment is too many layers removed from technology. While sometimes it can fit here, business or cultural aspects of it are a better fit for dedicated communities.
- Cybersecurity. While it heavily focuses on technology, most of the time it's too technical for most people who are not already invested in it. Should be posted in a dedicated communities unless it has broader connection to other tech areas.
Post guidelines
Title format
Post title should mirror the news source title. If you don't like the title of article, look for an alternative source instead of editorializing it.
URL format
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title. Opinion articles refer to articles that their publisher doesn't explictly endorse.
Country prefix
Country prefix can be added to the title with a separator (|, :, etc.) if the news is from a local publisher who doesn't clearly mention the country.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
view the rest of the comments
Yeah the article is pretty bad... But the missing context is Zuckerberg let a lot of devs go, and the lab that built something neat (Llama 1-4) has all but been dismantled.
The new hires reek of tech bro and big egos butting together, especially the (alleged) talk to close source their next models. 'TBD Lab' is supposedly tasked with the next Llama release, but I am not holding my breath.
Yeah, the reorganization does make sense on the surface, but ultimately its putting an increased emphasis on 'products' and the nonsense of building near-term AGI instead of basic NLP research that got them where they are.
Well yeah, it's Meta. I don't know why anyone would expect them to be doing anything less. Same with close sourcing their next models - of course that's the end goal. That's the end goal of every company that is making these things. They open source them and make them free until they have everyone locked in and can lock it down and start charging for it.
But they are putting the horse before the cart. These APIs and models are unsexy commodities, and Meta doesn’t have anything close to something they can charge for. Even OpenAI and Anthropic can barely justify it these days.
Others building on top Llama get them there, though. Which all the Chinese companies recognize now and are emulating: they can open the model, let it snowball with communal development to wipe out closed competitors, then offer products on top of it.
What’s conspicuous is that (at least some) in Meta recognized this. But Zuck is so fickle he won’t stick with any good idea.