Now imagine that instead of an iPad, you've just bought a new house with fantastic materials and an integrated software system. Should the company that built it have the right to control how and who interacts with your house?
I think his software was a work of art, distinct from a tool for making art. As Rich Hickey pointed out "Simple is often erroneously mistaken for easy."
Are you saying there's nothing new in this or that it's building on an already established approach? I think the latter is not something anyone is trying to hide - while the former doesn't seem correct.
What’s new in the paper is the technique to generate the gaussians from photos. The output that is used to render uses a technique that is a decade or three old, but not terribly practical until recently.
For me, a rendering guy, that’s great! The data used at render time is very simple and flexible. Simpler than triangles even when you get into non-trivial operations.
The view-dependent bit reflects the simplicity of the data. The data is similar to an oriented, stretchy box that you interpret as an oriented, stretchy, fuzzy ball (the Gaussian field). What you do from there is up to you.
Classically, researchers were interested in just using the splats at all. So, they just assigned a single color to each one.
This paper assigns a spherical harmonic-based color sphere instead. That gives it the view angle -> color function.
There is a second paper focused on moving splats. It just uses solid colored splats.
You could instead associate albedo/specular/roughness from real time materials and do real time lighting. But, you’d have to figure out how to generate/capture those values.
If LLMs are soon to become AGIs they will have as much right to read copyright works as anyone else. Is a post scarcity world where parasitic rent seeking would be pointless something to wish for, or do we consider it harmful?
So they want to align the AI with corporate goals. At least they're being honest here. I want a personal assistant to summarize a page, remove all advertising and do a fact check. Can we have that?
Does an LLM need to “know” what a fact is? I think what you’re asserting is mostly philosophical, and it doesn’t affect the end result which is that you demonstrably can provide certain LLMs with incorrect information and have that information corrected.
The open web was a nice idea but the economics for it were never sustainable. Ads lead to SEO spam and AI can be easily hacked because no one has figured out how to make statistical correlations "unhackable" so you'll eventually get sophisticated attacks like AI SEO spam that game whatever neural network is doing the summarizing to inject ads into the summaries.
There is a way to fix all these problems by removing profit motives but that's obviously practically unworkable so the quality of the content is just going to keep getting worse and worse until everyone starts using services like arxiv and semanticscholar to get any useful information because those will be the only places where neither the hosting nor the content is motivated by profit incentives.
Our open web is as sustainable as anything open: that is, it’s perfectly sustainable as long as people are not being jerks[0].
However, unlike most other open things that are subject to physical constraints, the Web is global—and globally there is a huge discrepancy in quality of life, level of education, mental health, freedom of thought, etc.
Which might mean that the ratio of figurative jerks relative to non-jerks stands to increase for as long as we have countries that are oppressed, poor, or otherwise score abysmally in relevant regards—or as long as we have global, open Web.
Either of those things will change, I personally hope that the former does.
First paragraph of the docs - "Spack is a package management tool designed to support multiple versions and configurations of software on a wide variety of platforms and environments. It was designed for large supercomputing centers, where many users and application teams share common installations of software on clusters with exotic architectures, using libraries that do not have a standard ABI. Spack is non-destructive: installing a new version does not break existing installations, so many configurations can coexist on the same system."
