zlacker

>>tablet+(OP)
This article does not touch on the thing which worries me the most with respect to LLMs: the dependence.

Unless you can run the LLM locally, on a computer you own, you are now completely dependent on a remote centralized system to do your work. Whoever controls that system can arbitrarily raise the prices, subtly manipulate the outputs, store and do anything they want with the inputs, or even suddenly cease to operate. And since, according to this article, only the latest and greatest LLM is acceptable (and I've seen that exact same argument six months ago), running locally is not viable (I've seen, in a recent discussion, someone mention a home server with something like 384G of RAM just to run one LLM locally).

To those of us who like Free Software because of the freedom it gives us, this is a severe regression.

>>cesarb+Zl
You can also make this argument to varying degrees about your internet connection, cloud provider, OS vendor, etc.

>>underd+0T
Well, you can’t really self-host your internet connection anyway :)

>>ku1ik+K62
Of course you can. It's called an AS (autonomous system), I think all you need is an IP address range, a physical link to someone willing to peer with you (another AS), some hardware, some paperwork, etc; and bam you're your own ISP.

My company has set this up for one of our customers (I wasn't involved).

>>rollca+mH2
> all you need is an IP address range, a physical link to someone willing to peer with you (another AS), some hardware, some paperwork, etc; and bam you're your own ISP.

I'm pretty sure the connotation of "self-host" entails a strictly substantially smaller scope than starting your own ISP.

Finding someone willing to peer with you also defeats the purpose. You are still fundamentally dependent on established ISPs.