Yes cause understanding software is important even if you use AI.

And even if you want to go full vibe code and never look at anything yourself the AI does need documentation, compare the performance of an agent on a large project with and without an AGENTS.md, the difference is massive. Without the agent usually does figure it out, but it spends a ton of tokens searching.

Am i the only one who likes the UN flag?

I would recommend using a classifier model instead of a text generation one.

As for the way to do it a simple program that connects to you mailbox via imap and calls the vllm or whatever api you are using and then moves it to spam could work?

Like you mean homebrew version as in hardware? that is already possible.

There is nothing stopping anyone from making an OpenXR compatible headset that runs linux, the steam frame is one example of this but its not like the steam frame invented this, its just really hard.

I said the same in another comment already.

As with everything, same with governments shoveling millions if not billions into microslop products it should be open. Open source/weight AI is very capable nowadays so it shouldn’t be an issue.

I don’t expect the government to be able to go into fully training their own foundational model, but a few racks in a government building somewhere can run open source/weight AI for a fraction of the cost. And is fully sovereign too instead of sending it to some provider.

Public money shouldn’t go to private corporations.

While true, i think it would be harder for something like the AfD to take over the EU central government then the german national government.

Why would a more integrated EU allow fascists to take over?

The fascists are anti EU and currently seem to be rapidly gaining power in national governments.

No idea if the fins are based enough for this but i would hope they run open source AI.

Public money shouldn’t go to private corporations.

Assuming the income stays the same

Corporations spend less = shareholders get richer

Governments spend less = other services get funded more, national deficit gets lower, taxes get reduced. Depending on what the government decides to spend the savings on.

How is it functionally the same?

If we accept that employees spend the same amount of time as without AI but now the error rate is reduced then yes. I don’t think that is the case but I don’t have the numbers so who knows.

I agree, but the article is about the Finnish government, unless there is something I don’t know they weren’t making any profit to begin with.

I’m making up numbers because I don’t have the actual numbers and 2x is easy for the example, insert whatever numbers you like.

The issue with that statement is that putting double the employees on a project doesn’t always improve its quality.

If we go with the numbers we have been going with and a employee with AI is twice as productive then adding AI effectively doubles the time available. This only leads to a quality increase if work was being cut short. If each employee already got the required time necessary to handle a application with full quality then you haven’t increased quality but the capacity. If the now increased capacity is far above normal volume it is a waste to have so much excess capacity.

No? Where have I excluded that option? If for normal volumes 100 employees are need to process. And with AI only 50 are needed, then it’s still cost saving?

Why are those mutually exclusive?

If a human clerk handling applications or something makes an error 1 in a 100 applications and an AI system has the same error rate but is far cheaper. Then quality stays the same.

That’s why I emphasized if, there are plenty ways to get lower quality with human employees aswell.

I don’t really understand the last paragraph, its a government so they don’t have a profit margin?

“We are not against the deployment of new technologies in a sensible manner, but we would oppose the use of AI if the primary motivation is to secure savings only,” said Simola. “Whatever the government decides on AI in the public sector transformation, the final implementation plan should not overlook what impact the changes will have on employees and on how public services are both managed and delivered to ensure quality and higher productivity.”

If AI can do the same job with equal quality, why would it be bad if the primary motivation is to secure savings only?

I’m not Finnish but as a citizen i would rather have my tax money spent on stuff that can’t be automated then on stuff that can.

They are scared of chinese open source AI

This might sound stupid but git?

I like the psionics (or well Psycasts) in rimworld and it has a prominent enough role.

Mind tech that calls some machine superintelligence to alter reality, bestowed by space feudalism.

Live in dorms. Cafeteria food. Minimum wage

I got that from this statement, my mistake then.