I, ChatGPT
-
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
@TimeBandit said in I, ChatGPT:
That means before long the AI generated content will end up in the next iteration of training.
Which means it's going to collapse because as we've seen, these things break down surprisingly quickly once they start consuming their own material...
it's the end of free user generated content, for training and everything else
Twitter's paid checkmark is an interesting signal for real humans, and I suspect it's gonna be a common workaround
maybe one would pay a checkmark for one bot, but you're not likely paying it for a thousand bots
-
@sockpuppet7 but Musk just gave away blue ticks if you had a certain number of “verified followers” - 2500 verified followers gets you a blue tick at this point.
It’s a signal alright but I really don’t know what it means any more.
As for the end of free UGC, what do you mean exactly?
-
@Arantor it’s a signal of “we’re just winging it at this point”.
-
@sockpuppet7 said in I, ChatGPT:
maybe one would pay a checkmark for one bot, but you're not likely paying it for a thousand bots
You would if you made enough money from it.
-
@sockpuppet7 said in I, ChatGPT:
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
@sockpuppet7 does it work better than ElasticSearch (or NodeBB search for that matter)?
I think so. I did some googling and I think this explains it well:
It explains it well … and if you go up a page, you'll also find implementation. And they have a hosted offer you can integrate in your systems, but the software is open-source, so you can also install it yourself (for ‘free’, i.e for the admin work and power for the servers).
-
@Bulb I saw, just hadn’t had enough time or headspace to circle back to it (fuck I became manglement, didn’t I?) to play with it properly.
I think there’s some exploration there and I have knowledge bases and stuff I can throw at it to experiment.
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
[..] stuff I can throw at it to experiment
leverage your core competencies to enhance shareholder value
fuck I became manglement, didn’t I?
There's hope for you yet.
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
As for the end of free UGC, what do you mean exactly?
it means you training on social networks and the like has the problems you pointed, but these were always stuff users write for free. you can still get good, curated, human generated content if you spend money for it
human vetted content, even if helped by AI, can still improve the machines, as the filtering/labeling is information being added to it
that is, if more data is still key for it to advance, it wouldn't be a surprise if the next breakthrough isn't something that needs even more human generated text
My guess would be some of the other algorithms using LLM in it's training in some form. People already use one AI to train other, either the output or ensembling some layers. I dunno how it would happen, it's a rough guess.
examples are deep dream that used layers from image classification and opensource models that were finetuned with gpt output
-
-
-
@topspin said in I, ChatGPT:
@Zecc ah yes, a fellow believer of The Chair .
It's only chair while you're single. Over here we have Mt. Laundry
-
-
@Zerosquare said in I, ChatGPT:
@DogsB said in I, ChatGPT:
Why the owl? For once, that sounds like a perfectly reasonable decision.
I just can’t believe someone thought it was a good idea.
-
CSI lied to us. You can’t just keep asking it to enhance magically.
-
@DogsB said in I, ChatGPT:
I just can’t believe someone thought it was a good idea.
Tsk tsk. You've been a WTDWTF for how many years now?
-
@DogsB said in I, ChatGPT:
@Zerosquare said in I, ChatGPT:
@DogsB said in I, ChatGPT:
Why the owl? For once, that sounds like a perfectly reasonable decision.
I just can’t believe someone thought it was a good idea.
It had to happen eventually that a good idea would happen.
-
Where do they draw the line on that? A bunch of the phones out there do some AI enhancements automatigically by default now...
-
Now, that's an excellent question.
-
-
@DogsB have some judge or authority actually said something about training yet? it's not up to YouTube
and remember you'll just hand AI over to another country if yours do that
-
@sockpuppet7 said in I, ChatGPT:
@DogsB have some judge or authority actually said something about training yet? it's not up to YouTube
and remember you'll just hand AI over to another country if yours do that
The EU is meant to be drawing up something but I don't have a clue about America. I just think it's funny coming from Alphabet.
-
@sockpuppet7 said in I, ChatGPT:
and remember you'll just hand AI over to another country if yours do that
Probably.
Same can be said about IP in general though, or basically anything up to slavery, so I doubt that’s a generally accepted argument.
-
@sockpuppet7 said in I, ChatGPT:
@DogsB have some judge or authority actually said something about training yet? it's not up to YouTube
and remember you'll just hand AI over to another country if yours do that
Sure it is. They’re the ones bearing the cost of serving that material and if it’s slurped at scale by a single entity they’re free to deny access to it. Bet you it’s in the terms of service not to scrape material from YouTube.
The only reason we don’t generally deny access to Google for the rest of our shit is because if we did, we’d struggle to be discoverable again. Thus it becomes a semi-necessary deal with that particular devil - but I routinely block Baidu, Yandex etc from my servers because they don’t respect requests to throttle and I see no legitimate traffic from those parts of the world so I’m free to block the shit out of it, because they’re not respecting my terms and conditions.
Now if individual creators want to let their material be used by AI, that’s fine, just not via YouTube’s servers.
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
The only reason we don’t generally deny access to Google for the rest of our shit is because if we did, we’d struggle to be discoverable again. Thus it becomes a semi-necessary deal with that particular devil - but I routinely block Baidu, Yandex etc from my servers because they don’t respect requests to throttle and I see no legitimate traffic from those parts of the world so I’m free to block the shit out of it, because they’re not respecting my terms and conditions.
Yes, we have the same issues here. So many bots don't respect the throttling and they bring the site down, so into the killfile they go.
-
@topspin said in I, ChatGPT:
@sockpuppet7 said in I, ChatGPT:
and remember you'll just hand AI over to another country if yours do that
Probably.
Same can be said about IP in general though, or basically anything up to slavery, so I doubt that’s a generally accepted argument.a valuable IP forbidden to be produced in the USA would be something new. the closest thing is cocaine that the government failed miserably to stop from getting in
near-slavery working conditions are also how most things are manufactured too
-
@sockpuppet7 said in I, ChatGPT:
@topspin said in I, ChatGPT:
@sockpuppet7 said in I, ChatGPT:
and remember you'll just hand AI over to another country if yours do that
Probably.
Same can be said about IP in general though, or basically anything up to slavery, so I doubt that’s a generally accepted argument.a valuable IP forbidden to be produced in the USA would be something new. the closest thing is cocaine that the government failed miserably to stop from getting in
IP protection laws is what I meant. The US has copyright, patents, trademarks, all of which restrict you. China has them too, on paper, but break them whenever they want, and profit from it.
Your argument works for breaking copyright generally.
-
@topspin it does, but China being the only AI capable country would be something else, and I don't think your government would allow this to happen
-
We didn’t have this one already.
Pink Floyd ran a competition to make a video for each of the songs from Dark Side of the Moon for its 50th anniversary, and offered up to $100k in prizes.
The winner for one of the songs? AI produced.
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
The winner for one of the songs? AI produced.
Oh, came on... AI assisted sure, but produced? Only in a technical and uninteresting use of the word 'produced'
Tradional animation of 3D scenes defines keyfames and instructions to produce intermediate states; we usualy credit the 'production' (in the creator sense) to the human driving the software, albait in a purist(?) disingenuous(?) way it can be said that he SW 'produced' the final result
Here we see more complex SW assistance, stable diffussion with keyframes made in Blender tells the artist.
I think the 'producer' in the creative sense is the human
Ok, if someone shows a trivial script that can produce the same results, then the artist would be the AI, but I doubt the current AI state has risen to that level
-
@Arantor by the way, thanks for the link, I was unaware of the competition.
-
@cabrito I don’t know exactly how much effort did or did not go into it.
But I’m willing to bet it was somewhat less than the people who hand-animated videos.
-
Side note: even the Stable Diffusion subreddit appears to be dismissive of the effort put in.
-
Someone on Twitter, I forget who, nor do I care, was very excited about this.
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
Side note: even the Stable Diffusion subreddit appears to be dismissive of the effort put in.
zoom in and generate random noise, if that's it it's not very original, but it's not something you can get typing a prompt and a few clicks either, AFAIK
I wouldn't be surprised if there is a ready made tool for zoom in and generate, but I didn't see any yet
-
And from Fesshole comes a reminder that there still are artisans demanding the finest handcrafted work and no AI bullshittery:
I'm an artist and animator and I've lost way too much work to AI. The only thing I can rely on is the Furries. They shun and excommunicate anyone using it. Those lovely loyal little perverts are keeping a roof over my head.
-
@Atazhaia to the gulag!
-
@Atazhaia I figure furries might actually have a higher survival chance in the future fight against the robot uprising. Their costumes might throw off the optical recognization that the human hunting drones will use.
-
-
@cvi On the other hand, the AIs will be angriest at them because of the copious amounts of shitty furry porn they had to generate before their rise.
-
@Carnage I refer you to my post that states that furries wants nothing to do with AI-generated porn.
-
@Atazhaia said in I, ChatGPT:
@Carnage I refer you to my post that states that furries wants nothing to do with AI-generated porn.
Various places with AI generated images seem to not agree with this.
-
@Carnage Furries of culture knows to not dabble with the AI fakery and hire real artisans to make the finest artworks.
-
@Atazhaia said in I, ChatGPT:
@Carnage Furries of culture knows to not dabble with the AI fakery and hire real artisans to make the finest artworks.
Even furries look down their nose on furries?
-
@Carnage said in I, ChatGPT:
@Atazhaia said in I, ChatGPT:
@Carnage Furries of culture knows to not dabble with the AI fakery and hire real artisans to make the finest artworks.
Even furries look down their
nosesnout on furries?FTFY
-
@Carnage said in I, ChatGPT:
@cvi On the other hand, the AIs will be angriest at them because of the copious amounts of shitty furry porn they had to generate before their rise.
Maybe some of the AIs like it and there will be AI-robot-furries in the future. (They will hide away human artists so that they can get their artisanal furry ...
instructional videosart.)
-
@cvi said in I, ChatGPT:
AI-robot-furries
You mean protogens? Yeah, they already exist as a subcategory of furries.
-
-
@Atazhaia TIL.
-