Singularity

NOTE -> I expect answer from people who actually have experience and strong understanding of these. please give something beneficial. I’m building a SaaS platform in Sri Lanka that handles documents and other sensitive data. Each user can upload their own documents and information, and the platform uses RAG to answer questions based on that user’s data. That part makes sense to me. My main concern is what happens when the user hasn’t uploaded enough information. I still want the LLM to provide accurate answers using reliable information from the internet (or from a curated knowledge base), with proper citations. These are the two architectures I’m considering: Option 1: Base LLM (OpenAI/Anthropic via Azure AI Foundry or Amazon Bedrock) ↓ Platform RAG (global knowledge base managed by us) ↓ User-specific RAG In this approach, we maintain a global knowledge base that we (the platform admins) curate and update. Every user can access this shared knowledge, while their own uploaded documents are searched through their personal RAG. Option 2: Open-source LLM ↓ Fine-tuned on Sri Lankan/domain-specific data ↓ User-specific RAG Here, we fine-tune an open-source model using Sri Lankan or domain-specific data, and each user still has their own RAG for their private documents. My concerns are: Is fine-tuning actually the right solution here, or is it unnecessary? Is a global/shared RAG a better approach than fine-tuning? How would you design this architecture if you wanted: Accurate answers from domain knowledge User-private document search Citations/sources Good scalability for thousands of users I’m leaning toward Option 1 because fine-tuning seems expensive, time-consuming, and I have no experience with it yet. However, I’m not sure if I’m thinking about this correctly. I’d really appreciate hearing how others would approach this problem submitted by /u/Fickle_Degree_2728 [link] [comments]

I’m curious what’s your timeline for disruptive level ai, where the world actually changes. (Kinda like what happened during COVID). Currently there’s still lots of people that deny AI is even really a thing, it’ll go away. When will governments get extremely involved (Covid style). Today our lives are more or less the same, we go to work, we drive the same cars, live in the same houses, we have the same routines, Ai we talk to here and there. I don’t think we’ll need super intelligence for this but I’m curious on what your timeline is, what the data says? I’ve read AI 2027 paper and many say it’s next year and the writers were correct. submitted by /u/shadowt1tan [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/Key_Category_8531 [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/Justgototheeffinmoon [link] [comments]

This is a crude editing I’ve managed to put together for the concept. If you can do a better job with the voicing, please do it. submitted by /u/Zalameda [link] [comments]

To avoid spamming you with all Links, I created a summary overview. submitted by /u/donutloop [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/plun9 [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/donutloop [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/LisannalGaib [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/yogthos [link] [comments]

Source: @Lentils Code: Opus 5 Ghibli submitted by /u/Successful-Earth678 [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/Umr_at_Tawil [link] [comments]

Thank goodness our elected representatives in the US government, whose approval will be needed for any possible oversight or regulation of the AI industry, are so in touch with the times! submitted by /u/Wilegar [link] [comments]

To be fair this is actually 2 shots because i decided to include my own voices after the first test. But i think the way Opus can transform an environnement into a different one is pretty crazy. The ONLY asset i gave Opus was the voices, but he did his own voices at first. My general idea was to see if it could transform the house into an old one and then transform it back. submitted by /u/Silver-Chipmunk7744 [link] [comments]

From: (296) Sam Altman – How to Start a Startup – YouTube (16:46) Edit: The title tries to convey “Sam Altman uses unambiguous language to confirm his belief of us being in the singularity” submitted by /u/Kaarssteun [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/Deep-Owl-1890 [link] [comments]

original X post: https://x.com/minebench_ai/status/2080880340584026251 every time i think the benchmark’s saturated some new model comes and raises the bar submitted by /u/Ballist1cGamer [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/Anen-o-me [link] [comments]

ICYMI: students have been protesting in india to reform the education system. submitted by /u/maskedorange [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/donutloop [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/Charuru [link] [comments]

x submitted by /u/SuggestionMission516 [link] [comments]

Coming soon… submitted by /u/HomeNowWTF [link] [comments]

The full quote: I realize that some people really dislike AI, but this is an area where I’m willing to absolutely put my foot down as the top-level maintainer. Linux is not one of those anti-AI projects, and if somebody has issues with that, they can do the open-source thing and fork it. Or just walk away. AI is a tool, just like other tools we use. And it’s clearly a useful one. It may not have been that “clearly” even just a year ago, but it’s no longer in question today. There are other questions around AI (like what the economy of it will actually look like in the end), but “is it useful” is no longer one of those questions. Anybody who doubts that clearly hasn’t actually used it. Yes, it can also be a somewhat painful tool, both for maintainer workloads and just from a “it keeps finding embarrassing bugs” standpoint. But the solution is not to put your head in the sand and sing “La La La, I can’t hear you” at the top of your voice like some people seem to do. The solution is to make sure those LLM tools help maintainers instead of just causing them pain. There’s no question on that side. We’re not forcing anybody to use it, but I will very loudly ignore people who try to argue against other people from using it. And no, AI isn’t perfect. But Christ, anybody who points to the problems at AI had better be looking in the mirror and pointing at themselves at the same time. Because it’s not like natural intelligence is always all that great either. The kernel project has been and will continue to be about the technology. Sure, the social angle of working on open source is important and often a very motivating part of the project, but in the end that’s a side benefit, not the point of the project. This is NOT some kind of “social warrior” project, never has been, and never will be. In the kernel community we do open source because it results in better technology, not >because of religious reasons. And so we make decisions primarily based on technical merit. Not fear of new tools. Linus submitted by /u/PointmanW [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/DnDNecromantic [link] [comments]