I refuse to call it the “Threadiverse” I feel like it gives Meta a valid place here, and frankly? They can get themselves well and truly to fuck.

Other than that one point of contention, absolutely agree. If broader use and acceptance as an alternative is what we want as a community, we need to have these niche spaces that places like Reddit currently have the bogart on.

I’m not entirely sure we’re missing out on all that much with a few porn instances missing.

… obviously porn…you’re missing the porn

Wouldn’t charging money for blue checks or adding a subscription leave them open to lawsuits? That’s really the only reason I can think of, wanting to make money.

A fairly large portion of governments globally

10 and ^15/16ths sadly. It’s being marketed as AI boosted to 12 though!

Eh, it happens. If that was an honest attempt to troll…kids these days need to up their fucking game.

slightly less stupid

Which is why that’s definitely not what’s going to happen…

Big Brother Watch, Open Rights Group and Index on Censorship made a submission to the court, arguing against proceedings taking in place in secret and in favour of open justice. Today, the Tribunal has rejected the Home Office’s application, stating it did not accept “that the revelation of the bare details of the case would be damaging to the public interest or prejudicial to national security”.

Neither myself nor, I’m assuming, the person you’re replying to wants to have the government with their grubby little fingers in our data.
What the person you’re replying to was saying had literally nothing to do with what you asked. Has to do with the above. It’s shocking that a UK court actually made a sane call. In this case, they decided that no, the government wasn’t entitled to a closed case. That the proceedings would be open, and the details would be available to the public. Like in a functioning democracy.

If it doesn’t apply to niche diet comms idfk what it applies to…

taps nose

This

Technically a grey area. How many humans do you see here posting walls of text and putting the attribution at the very top, if the attribution is different from their username of course.

ChadGPT

Maybe not a post joke world, but certainly one where Onion articles are more believable than real ones…

Exactly, I was trying to make that point, and specifically looked at Meta and the current “Torrenting is only Illegal if you seed” bs defence they’re using. Which was completely ignored by our friend over there.

Sure, cool…coolcoolcool…

So how about the ongoing lawsuit where there’s been hard evidence of Meta torrenting terabytes of data, and then claiming it’s not illegal because they didn’t seed?

And that’s literally only for people who posted on FB or Instagram or whatever other garbage data mines Meta are operating. The above is what I was talking about. The highly public trial that relates specifically to torrenting data illegally to train an LLM. That’s what I was talking about. Whoever got fucked by Meta’s T&C’s to train their AI are SoL, which is why I didn’t mention any training they were doing on their platforms specifically.

I personally believe there could be a place in a person’s creative workflow for the use of AI as a tool to enhance their own creative work…with caveats…

As for the ethics of using AI to copy and art style? It’s theft. End of.

These models are trained on stolen data. The artists/musicians/writers/intellectuals, or their estates, never gave permission for their works to be used to train these models. They never receive royalties, or payment of any kind, for the use of their works. And as we’re finding out, at the very least, Meta took that data…those creative works… illegally. People’s lives have been destroyed by laws put in place to protect IP. I personally feel those laws are fucked and should be fully scrapped in favour of something that actually protects the people creating these works. That doesn’t change the fact that when Joe Shmoe shares a torrent he could be hit with fines and possibly jail. Fines alone could essentially make a person’s life literal hell for however long they have left. The companies who have trained these models are likely going to get a “cost of doing business” slap on the wrist.

It’s ethically ambiguous if you look at it from the standpoint of “IP law shouldn’t exist” while totally ignoring that even if these companies get away with it common people nearly never will.

because why else would you go to a whole other post to “prove a point” about downvoting?
It wasn’t you (you claim)

I do claim. I have an alt, didn’t downvote you there either. Was just pointing out that you were also making assumptions. And it’s all comments in the same thread, hardly me going to an entirely different post to prove a point.

We will not get the benefits of Generative AI if we don’t 1. deal with the problems that are coming from it, and 2. Stop trying to shoehorn it into everything. And that’s the discussion that’s happening here.

I agree. And while I personally feel like there’s already room for it in some people’s workflow, it is very clearly problematic in many ways. As I had pointed out in my first comment.

I’m not going to even try to justify to you what I said in this post or that one because I honestly don’t think you care.

I do actually! Might be hard to believe, but I reacted the way I did because I felt your first comment was reductive, and intentionally trying to invalidate and derail my comment without actually adding anything to the discussion. That made me angry because I want a discussion. Not because I want to be right, and fuck you for thinking differently.

If you’re willing to talk about your views and opinions, I’d be happy to continue talking. If you’re just going to assume I don’t care, and don’t want to hear what other people think…then just block me and move on. 👍

and here you are, downvoting my valid point

Wasn’t me actually.

valid point

You weren’t really making a point in line with what I was saying.

regardless of whether we view it as a reliable information source, that’s what it is being marketed as and results like this harm both the population using it, and the people who have found good uses for it. And no, I don’t actually agree that it’s good for creative processes as assistance tools and a lot of that has to do with how you view the creative process and how I view it differently. Any other tool at the very least has a known quantity of what went into it and Generative AI does not have that benefit and therefore is problematic.

This is a really valid point, and if you had taken the time to actually write this out in your first comment, instead of “Tell that to the guy that was expecting factual information from a hallucination generator!” I wouldn’t have reacted the way I did. And we’d be having a constructive conversation right now. Instead you made a snide remark, seemingly (personal opinion here, I probably can’t read minds) intending it as an invalidation of what I was saying, and then being smug about my taking offence to you not contributing to the conversation and instead being kind of a dick.

🥵🥵🥵💦

Ok? If you read what I said, you’ll see that I’m not talking about using ChatGPT as an information source. I strongly believe that using LLMs as a search tool is incredibly stupid…for exactly reasons like it being so very confident when relaying inaccurate or completely fictional information.
What I was trying to say, and I get that I may not have communicated that very well, was that Generative Machine Learning Algorithms might find a niche as creative process assistant tools. Not as a way to search for publicly available information on your neighbour or boss or partner. Not as a way to search for case law while researching the defence of your client in a lawsuit. And it should never be relied on to give accurate information about what colour the sky is, or the best ways to make a custard using gasoline.

Does that clarify things a bit? Or do you want to carry on using an LLM in a way that has been shown to be unreliable, at best, as some sort of gotcha…when I wasn’t talking about that as a viable use case?