I asked about Russia, not Ukraine.

Can Russia end the war immediately, or does Russia need the permission of the west to do so?

You are contradicting yourself. Can russia stop the war immediately, or do they need the permission of the west to do so? Both can't be true simultaneously

Again, Putin is the only one who can guatanteed end this. You ignore that.

The west abandoning Ukraine in no way guarantees that Russia stops killing Ukrainians, or Ukrainians stop killing Russians.

Is it likely that Ukraine capitulates without Western support? Yes. Is it likely to happen the next day? No. Id it guaranteed to happen at all? No.

Is it likely that Russia stops killing Ukrainians? Yes. Is it likely to stop the next day? No.

The only person who can end this within a day, Putin, chooses not to, and instead chooses the deaths of millions.

You keep mentioning how the west could end this, but are completely silent about the fact that so could Putin, and with much less bloodshed.

If the west stopped supporting Ukraine, Ukraine would continue to fight for some time still. And after a capitulation there would likely ne purges killing still more Ukrainians.

So no, Ukraine could not end the killings tomorrow. Putin could. He chooses not to. He chooses the death of millions of Russians and Ukrainians. Because he truly does not care.

Of course it does not change reality. Why would you even think that?

Do you often have the feeling that writing changes reality?

Putin chooses the death of millions of Russians and Ukrainians regardless of what you or I write.

What does the fact that Russia is winning have to do with anything? If anything, it would mean it's even easier to end the war by withdrawing as they would not need to be worried about a counterinvasion?

Putin could end the war tomorrow. He chooses not to. Maybe he chooses not to, because he thinks he is winning? It does not matter. What matters is that he chooses not to end it, killing millions.

I'm struggling with Putin willing to kill millions instead of using basic diplomacy.

I think you are replying to the wrong person?

I did not say it helps with accuracy. I did not say LLMs will get better. I did not even say we should use LLMs.

But even if I did, non of your points are relevant for the Firefox usecase.

Wikipedia is no less reliable than other content. There's even academic research about it (no, I will not dig for sources now, so feel free to not believe it). But factual correctness only matters for models that deal with facts: for e.g a translation model it does not matter.

Reddit has a massive amount of user-generated content it owns, e.g. comments. Again, the factual correctness only matters in some contexts, not all.

I'm not sure why you keep mentioning LLMs since that is not what is being discussed. Firefox has no plans to use some LLM to generate content where facts play an important role.

What do you mean "full set if data"?

Obviously you can not train on 100% of material ever created, so you pick a subset. There is a a lot of permissively licensed content (e.g. Wikipedia) and content you can license (e.g. Reddit). While not sufficient for an advanced LLM, it certainly is for smaller models that do not need wide knowledge.

Feel free to assume that, but don't claim an assumption as a fact.

You recommended using native package managers. How many of them have been audited?

You know what else we shouldn't assume? That that it doesn't have a security feature. And we additionally then shouldn't go around posting that incorrect assumption as if it were a fact. You know, like you did.