I, ChatGPT
-
@topspin I suggest compression of the audiophiles. Preferably lossy compression.
-
No true audiophile is going to go for either digital format, it has to be vinyl with an analogue amp for that Warner richer sound.
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
that Warner richer sound.
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
No true audiophile is going to go for either digital format, it has to be vinyl with an analogue amp for that Warner richer sound.
I have to admit that vinyl has a... Warmer? sound for classical. Then I looked at the price of vinyl and that you have to replace them every now and then. I suddenly discovered vinyl is not for me.
Live classical has ruined me though and you can get tickets for the price of vinyl!
-
@HardwareGeek damn autocorrect.
-
@DogsB yes, I meant warmer, not sure how I got autocorrected to Warner.
-
@Arantor Don't let your vinyl get too much warmer, though, or it'll warp.
-
@HardwareGeek said in I, ChatGPT:
@topspin I suggest compression of the audiophiles. Preferably lossy compression.
But then, you'd end up with similar-sounding, but technically different, nonsensical arguments from them after you reverse the process.
Hey, wait a minute... you haven't actually said anything about reversing the process.
-
@Zerosquare Sufficiently compressed audiophiles will be unable to be reverse-compressed.
-
@Zerosquare Come to think of it, the compression need not be lossy to be effective. Audiophiles are somewhat sparse. Simply remove all the empty space; they could then be reinflated with only minimal change to the content. After all, their brains weren't actually using any oxygen from that air.
-
@HardwareGeek Yeah, agreed any compression method should achieve a good outcome, as long as the compression reaches a thousand atmospheres or so.
-
@cvi I know! Carbon fiber submersibles!
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
@DogsB yes, I meant warmer, not sure how I got autocorrected to Warner.
Auto carrot is powered by Artificial Intelligence which was especially well trained for product placement.
-
@DogsB said in I, ChatGPT:
I have to admit that vinyl has a... Warmer? sound for classical. Then I looked at the price of vinyl and that you have to replace them every now and then. I suddenly discovered vinyl is not for me.
There are still a few meters left:
(about twice that amount)
I listen to the records, and haveAudacity
writing it toflac
files. Afterwards, the record goes to the rubbish bin...
I tried to give them away at the price of postage, but that's too expensive for today's cheapies.
-
Slap on the wrist really.
-
Just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD.
-
So I remembered this post which prompted for making the modern world in the style of Billy Joel's "We Didn't Start The Fire".
Naturally my brain only just remembered this post and I figured I'd spend 2 minutes throwing the concept at ChatGPT.
I have to say it did better than I expected.
The last 50 years of humanity, according to ChatGPT, in the style of Billy Joel
(Verse 1)
Vietnam War and civil rights,
Moon landing, shining lights,
Hippies, love, and peace, my friend,
Woodstock, a message to send.Watergate, Nixon's fall,
Energy crisis, oil's call,
Punk rock's rebellion, breaking free,
Disco fever, grooving spree.(Chorus)
We didn't start the fire,
But it's been burning since the world's been turning.
We didn't start the fire,
No, we didn't light it, but we tried to fight it.(Verse 2)
Reaganomics, Thatcher's reign,
Berlin Wall, divided pain,
Chernobyl's disaster, a haunting sight,
Live Aid, stars shining bright.Internet's birth, a digital age,
Globalization, connecting the stage,
Cold War ends, hope in the air,
Nelson Mandela, breaking apartheid's snare.(Chorus)
We didn't start the fire,
But it's been burning since the world's been turning.
We didn't start the fire,
No, we didn't light it, but we tried to fight it.(Bridge)
Technology advances, fast and wide,
Cell phones, social media collide,
Terrorist attacks, fear and dread,
9/11, tears were shed.Financial crisis, markets crash,
Arab Spring, freedom's flash,
Climate change, a planet's plea,
Protests rise for equity.(Chorus)
We didn't start the fire,
But it's been burning since the world's been turning.
We didn't start the fire,
No, we didn't light it, but we tried to fight it.(Verse 3)
Brexit's division, Europe's shift,
Trump's election, a political rift,
#MeToo movement, voices arise,
Black Lives Matter, equality tries.Pandemic strikes, the world in pain,
Lockdowns, masks, a global campaign,
Vaccines bring hope, a light in the dark,
Frontline heroes, leaving their mark.(Chorus)
We didn't start the fire,
But it's been burning since the world's been turning.
We didn't start the fire,
No, we didn't light it, but we tried to fight it.(Outro)
The last 50 years, a tale of change,
A rollercoaster ride, wide in range,
Through the rhythm of time, we rise and fall,
But together we stand, for we've seen it all.
Fucking hell, humanity really is doomed, isn't it?
-
-
@izzion said in I, ChatGPT:
AI is killing the old web, and the new web struggles to
bewithbpornis the age of IA powered teledilonics there yet? asking for a
friend
-
Can we update WTDWTF such that you need to pass a Voight-Kampff test in order to
not be terminatedsign up?
-
@cvi said in I, ChatGPT:
Can we update WTDWTF such that you need to pass a Voight-Kampff test in order to
not be terminatedsign up?Looking at the 2-3 people or "people" who like bugs and critters in the emergency cute things thread, I'm having doubts about the effectiveness.
-
-
@HardwareGeek said in I, ChatGPT:
@cvi I know! Carbon fiber submersibles!
Just imagine what the acoustics are like!
-
The speed of sound in water is much higher than in air. I'm sure you could convince audiophiles that it'd make the music sound much better as a result.
-
@Zerosquare No, on the contrary, it gets worse.
Since the distance of the ears stays fixedd, the time difference of a stereo signal arriving at the ears gets reduced. Consequently, the stereo perception gets worse.
=> your idea is underwater!
-
I'm sorry, your audiophile card application has been rejected. You know too much about physics.
-
@izzion said in I, ChatGPT:
I just read it as content being generated for free by their users is on risk of being over. CNN isn't going to be replace by a low quality AI, neither does Fox News, or thedailywtf.com.
I don't give a $#$% for social networks
-
@sockpuppet7 said in I, ChatGPT:
@izzion said in I, ChatGPT:
I just read it as content being generated for free by their users is on risk of being over. CNN isn't going to be replace by a low quality AI, neither does Fox News, or thedailywtf.com.
-
@sockpuppet7 that’s not really the takeaway here. The issue is that it’s already hard enough to drive traffic to sites as it is because the level of competition for any one thing is bad enough - but imagine when instead of competing with dozens and dozens of content farms as you are today for anything, tomorrow you’ll be competing with hundreds and hundreds.
The amount of raw sewage in the internet clogging them pipes is accelerating at a frightening rate to the point where before long it might as well be impossible to find anything you actually want.
Imagine the internet how it was before Google came along, when we had human curated directories because the search engines of the day we’re so useless youd frequently have to hit page 4-5 to find even a single useful link.
Except now it’ll be page 10, page 20, because the spam volumes are only going to accelerate from here on for a bit.
-
@sockpuppet7 said in I, ChatGPT:
CNN isn't going to be replace by a low quality AI
It would likely be an improvement.
-
@Arantor After a while some will emerge who'll be able to keep the spam out of their little gardens of useful stuff and people will move there and the content farms will have to go look for new crooked stile to get back in the game (and the cycle will repeat ad nauseam).
Or maybe internet will become so useless people will throw out and trample down their slyphones and start reading books and talk to each other like in the old days. One can dream…
-
@Bulb I genuinely don't know about that. Google has been losing the war against the content farms for a while now, and the firehose hasn't fully engaged yet. When it does, and goes full throttle, I honestly think it's a matter of months before Google/Bing/friends go from being relatively useless to "making Altavista look good" levels of useless. Right now the search engines are still better than the olden days - but not by a lot.
It needs someone to fully come in and disrupt the market but I don't think anyone has the tech to do it yet.
I think you may even be right that people will start to engage with each other again. But I also think we'll see a return to the human-curated directories of old as the next major iteration of discovery for the simple reason that the arms race is, as far as I can tell, about to be lost to the machines.
But it'll put some of the snake oil people out of business, and I don't feel quite so bad about it after all.
-
@HardwareGeek said in I, ChatGPT:
@sockpuppet7 said in I, ChatGPT:
CNN isn't going to be replace by a low quality AI
It would likely be an improvement.
They should absolutely replace it with a convoluted neural network.
Filed under: I'm sure no one's ever made this joke before.
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
But I also think we'll see a return to the human-curated directories of old as the next major iteration of discovery for the simple reason that the arms race is, as far as I can tell, about to be lost to the machines.
I'm also thinking along these lines. Either Google et al. step up their game on filtering content, or they'll be gradually replaced.
We already have some human-curated lists. The large ones are currently also struggling under the load, but smaller ones on specialized topics aren't that bad yet.
I think a different problem is that AI can generate content that somebody specifically likes, regardless of its accuracy. Might be preferable to a curated list to some...
-
@cvi We need to get to the point where the curated list is curated based on its merit, not on whether people 'like' it and such lists need to stem the tide of being accessible based on popularity for them to have any value whatsoever.
I also think we need to take a similar approach to replacing Wikipedia with a curated hierarchical-editor approach rather than the wasteland that is the moderation on Wikipedia right now.
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
based on its merit
Not necessarily disagreeing, but how do you measure "merit" in a way that doesn't ultimately depend on some specific people (not) liking it?
You'll run into the same problems as something like relying on peer review (which is the worst, except for all the other systems).
-
@Arantor Directories never went away, at least not completely. There are things I'd always look up in a company directory rather than text search, because the results have always been more relevant there, and I would use special search engine for products to shop online that only lists actual shops and has a moderation mechanism to exclude the problematic ones (mostly; someone has to report them, of course). And maps are also a special case that is somewhat curated.
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
@cvi We need to get to the point where the curated list is curated based on its merit, not on whether people 'like' it and such lists need to stem the tide of being accessible based on popularity for them to have any value whatsoever.
I also think we need to take a similar approach to replacing Wikipedia with a curated hierarchical-editor approach rather than the wasteland that is the moderation on Wikipedia right now.
You need paid curation, but you also need to find curators that take seriously the idea that you are tending to the content and not pushing things to promote your own profit. It is a tremendously hard balance to get right.
-
@dkf Who will curate the curators?
-
@dkf I never said it was easy. That said there are people out there who would happily sit and do the needful, accurately, with citations and everything, and for free for the sake of it being out there/for the greater good (sincerely), but these people were all burned hardcore by the dipshit moderation on Wikipedia.
-
-
@ixvedeusi The curator curators, obviously.
-
"AI is going to take all the jobs!"
AI accepting jobs:
-
-
@Bulb
u/spez
, of course
-
Ah yes, the age-old question:
How many curators could a curator curate, if a curator could curate curators?
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in I, ChatGPT:
@Bulb
u/spez
, of courseSomeone should hack turddit and change his username to spaz.
-
@Carnage said in I, ChatGPT:
@Applied-Mediocrity said in I, ChatGPT:
@Bulb
u/spez
, of courseSomeone should hack turddit and change his username to spaz.
Naturally I went looking for the wrong thing and found
12 dolllars! I’d like six please.
-
Little known fact, there was a rival to Wikipedia back in the day, the Open Encyclopedia, or Open Site as it was known, and was essentially operated under the same thinking as Dmoz, that it was hierarchical and people got editing rights for tiny leaf branches and earned more over time, with more senior editors doing crazy things like discussing if the changes were sensible.
I do often wonder what the alternate future looks like where Wikipedia didn’t take off and OE did.
-
Also:
Nupedia was an English-language, online encyclopedia whose articles were written by volunteer contributors with appropriate subject matter expertise, reviewed by expert editors before publication, and licensed as free content. It was founded by Jimmy Wales and underwritten by Bomis, with Larry Sanger as editor-in-chief. Nupedia operated from October 1999 until September 2003. It is best known today as the predecessor of Wikipedia. Nupedia had a seven-step approval process to control content of articles before being posted, rather than live wiki-based updating. Nupedia was designed by a committee of experts who predefined the rules. It had only 21 articles in its first year, compared to Wikipedia having 200 articles in the first month, and 18,000 in the first year.