Lobachevsky's recent activity
-
Comment on An AI-generated country song is topping a Billboard chart, and that should infuriate us all in ~music
-
Comment on An AI-generated country song is topping a Billboard chart, and that should infuriate us all in ~music
Lobachevsky Link ParentBecause it's absurd to demand compensation based on some internal intentions you may have had 10 years ago that weren't explicitly stated.Because it's absurd to demand compensation based on some internal intentions you may have had 10 years ago that weren't explicitly stated.
-
Comment on An AI-generated country song is topping a Billboard chart, and that should infuriate us all in ~music
Lobachevsky Link ParentI meant as opposed to making anyone that have already trained a model on their works retroactively pay for it.I meant as opposed to making anyone that have already trained a model on their works retroactively pay for it.
-
Comment on Part of me wishes it wasn't true but: AI coding is legit in ~tech
Lobachevsky LinkThe conversation around AI is sadly insanely polluted with toupee fallacy, people using it incorrectly, for suboptimal use cases or indeed training it incorrectly. As well as the completely...The conversation around AI is sadly insanely polluted with toupee fallacy, people using it incorrectly, for suboptimal use cases or indeed training it incorrectly. As well as the completely unrealistic standard of comparing 1 short prompt and 10 seconds of time to many man hours not counting education/training. Plus just plain ideological hatred/shilling. The best way is to look at concrete results rather than opinions.
-
Comment on An AI-generated country song is topping a Billboard chart, and that should infuriate us all in ~music
Lobachevsky Link ParentWe aren't talking about licensing the training process. It's very debatable that it would be required as opposed to falling under fair use. We're talking about downloading media illegally, i.e....We aren't talking about licensing the training process. It's very debatable that it would be required as opposed to falling under fair use. We're talking about downloading media illegally, i.e. piracy. This only applies to something like downloading a Disney movie. 99% of the time the conversation about AI being "theft" revolves around artists and content creators that post their content online to be freely accessed, so scraping it isn't the same thing as pirating a movie or whatever.
-
Comment on An AI-generated country song is topping a Billboard chart, and that should infuriate us all in ~music
Lobachevsky Link ParentAgain, you're using the word "ripping", but I don't see how it is that. Remixes and edits exist on YouTube just fine. I'm aware, that's why I said that companies should pay for the data. But this...Elements publicly posted for free viewing is not the same as being made for public use. I can view a lot of things on YouTube, but created content is protected by the law. And again, there is a difference between a single person ripping a free YouTube video, and a corporation ripping millions of videos.
Again, you're using the word "ripping", but I don't see how it is that. Remixes and edits exist on YouTube just fine.
Individual piracy is not the same as corporate piracy.
I'm aware, that's why I said that companies should pay for the data. But this is a criticism of individual companies, not of "AI". Again, if that's the extent of your position on why it's "stealing" or "ripping", then it seems extremely misleading to use those terms.
-
Comment on An AI-generated country song is topping a Billboard chart, and that should infuriate us all in ~music
Lobachevsky Link ParentThat's fine and good, but do you acknowledge that "being based on" and "stealing from" are fundamentally different concepts and the difference between them makes or breaks your argument? To also...That's fine and good, but do you acknowledge that "being based on" and "stealing from" are fundamentally different concepts and the difference between them makes or breaks your argument?
To also be clear, I think there are a variety of better ways of describing whatever AI are doing with music et al than "stealing". I'm trying to say that it is not at all intuitive and you haven't demonstrated why exactly it is theft.
As I said in the previous post, piracy is not at all the same. I don't even think anyone would ever say "I stole a PDF of a textbook" because it's just not the same thing intuitively as lifting a book from a shop. So yes, in my opinion there's clear distinction there. Personally I also don't particularly care about piracy that much. In fact I think copyright laws are too draconian and way more works should be in public domain. I do agree that just as schools should pay for textbooks and companies should not pirate the training data. Thankfully there's no inherent requirement for training data to be pirated, it is not at all a problem with AI as a technology.
Now if you want to argue that using works publicly posted for free to view and download for AI training is stealing and every one of those authors is owed a compensation then you really should make a strong argument for it, because I don't see it. I mean, did Google researches know that AI was gonna become a golden goose when they posted their paper on Transformer architecture for all to use? No. Are they now retroactively owed compensation because their work is now being used to make billions? I don't think so. Neither do I think that everyone who posted their art/music/whatever online is now owed compensation because it happened to be used to train valuable models. That's just... progress.
Now if you want to say that you should be able to opt out of whatever you're posting to be used in AI training going forward through appropriate licenses, I can definitely see that argument having validity.
-
Comment on An AI-generated country song is topping a Billboard chart, and that should infuriate us all in ~music
Lobachevsky Link ParentI can't help but notice that you go from "actively stealing" to "being based on". It's just wild how liberally the word theft is used when it comes to conversations about AI. And I don't know...I can't help but notice that you go from "actively stealing" to "being based on". It's just wild how liberally the word theft is used when it comes to conversations about AI. And I don't know about you, but it's not really obvious to me that authors are owed money for any algorithm that uses their works as input. Like if I run a script that takes articles published online, takes a random adjective, verb, noun from each and cleverly arranges them into a legible text - do I now owe financial recompense to every single author of an article that I used? It doesn't make any sense to me, the value of the finished work (if any) would be in the clever arrangement of the words, each one on their own would be worthless. Similarly, a raw dataset is just a pile of garbage, the value comes from filtering it, labeling it, writing an algorithm to train on it, from compute costs, from R&D behind it all. All of that work is not done by the original authors.
You could say, well what about the data that wasn't openly published on the internet, and yes indeed that would be piracy if it was downloaded illegally, something that no one really disagrees with including the courts. Yet it is NEVER talked about in AI criticisms, probably because in the eyes of most people piracy isn't really such a big deal, instead we have the accusations of "callous theft!" and such, which is in my opinion simply disingenuous.
-
Comment on ‘I realised I’d been ChatGPT-ed into bed’: how ‘Chatfishing’ made finding love on dating apps even weirder in ~tech
Lobachevsky LinkThe "solution" seems simple. Don't text for days, go on dates. It seems like 90% of complaining about dating apps is due to people using them wrong. I also don't know if you can really assign a...The "solution" seems simple. Don't text for days, go on dates. It seems like 90% of complaining about dating apps is due to people using them wrong.
I also don't know if you can really assign a moral failing to doing this. Seems pretty in line with constructing a dating profile in the first place. The competitive environment is such that you practically have to use your best photos, best moments, best aspects to craft an attractive image - lest the person on the other side just moves on to their next option.
Naturally it's really stupid to do this if you are incapable of having a conversation in person - much like regular catfishing. But ultimately I think a dose of "don't hate the player, hate the game" is appropriate here.
-
Comment on The Oatmeal: A cartoonist's review of AI art in ~comics
Lobachevsky Link ParentThank you. Honestly it felt for a long time like it's such a discussion in English speaking communities precisely because the the word "art" refers to imagery as well.Thank you. Honestly it felt for a long time like it's such a discussion in English speaking communities precisely because the the word "art" refers to imagery as well.
-
Comment on Bluesky melts down over Jesse Singal in ~tech
Lobachevsky Link ParentAs I said, I just joined the platform. Obviously I don't follow anyone so the "Following" feed is just empty. I didn't find anyone worth following in the "Discover" feed.As I said, I just joined the platform. Obviously I don't follow anyone so the "Following" feed is just empty. I didn't find anyone worth following in the "Discover" feed.
-
Comment on Bluesky melts down over Jesse Singal in ~tech
Lobachevsky Link ParentIt doesn't depend on the people you follow, that's the default experience when you first sign up into the app. I just thought it was supposed to be some actually good X/twitter alternative when in...It doesn't depend on the people you follow, that's the default experience when you first sign up into the app. I just thought it was supposed to be some actually good X/twitter alternative when in reality it's exactly the same just with a leftist flavor.
-
Comment on Bluesky melts down over Jesse Singal in ~tech
Lobachevsky Link ParentAs I said, it was extremely dominant in the default feed and I have tried fruitlessly to filter it out.As I said, it was extremely dominant in the default feed and I have tried fruitlessly to filter it out.
-
Comment on Bluesky melts down over Jesse Singal in ~tech
Lobachevsky Link ParentWell I stopped using it after public conversations about something something assassinations are good actually violent uprising capitalist class must be purged, but I don't recall the exact details...Well I stopped using it after public conversations about something something assassinations are good actually violent uprising capitalist class must be purged, but I don't recall the exact details since it was a while ago. And yeah of course majority was trump bad elon bad etc. I just personally don't want to engage with that type of userbase, have enough of that on reddit.
-
Comment on Bluesky melts down over Jesse Singal in ~tech
Lobachevsky LinkIs the platform genuinely useful for anything? When I joined, my feed was about 20% random pictures of stuff and 80% incredibly extreme leftist US politics. I spent perhaps a week clicking "not...Is the platform genuinely useful for anything? When I joined, my feed was about 20% random pictures of stuff and 80% incredibly extreme leftist US politics. I spent perhaps a week clicking "not interested" on every single one of those posts and it didn't matter. Filters didn't help because a ton of them were pictures of text (extremely annoying practice).
-
Comment on The Buff Scammer, isolation, and the male loneliness epidemic in ~life.men
Lobachevsky LinkMy experience tells me that the root of the issue is due to the fact that men are expected to initiate and pursued. This results in men getting almost no experience being pursued while men getting...My experience tells me that the root of the issue is due to the fact that men are expected to initiate and pursued. This results in men getting almost no experience being pursued while men getting almost no experience pursuing. Thus both sexes in a heterosexual context lack the opposite experience and fail their interactions more often as a result. We see examples of this all the time with men not recognizing the subtle signals, not stopping or not pursuing hard enough, or women rejecting really harshly or not knowing how to say no. It's just bad for the overall dynamic to have such one sided culture.
-
Comment on British AI startup beats humans in international forecasting in ~tech
Lobachevsky (edited )Link ParentThen either this isn't the whole story or the human ability to "reason" is worse at these predictions than "literally the idea to spit out the most likely next token given an input set" and as...Literally the idea of these agents is to spit out the most likely next token given an input set, and predicting future events is somewhat an effort in extrapolation. If anything, this just lowers my confidence in the human ability to predict future events.
Then either this isn't the whole story or the human ability to "reason" is worse at these predictions than "literally the idea to spit out the most likely next token given an input set" and as such isn't as valuable (at these predictions).
The real take is that finding patterns in the data has a LOT of very solid applications in a variety of fields and machine learning is seemingly an incredibly useful tool that excels at finding patterns in the data. Or at the very least exceeds human ability to do so.
One of the most straightforward examples when a "dumb" algorithm outperformed human expert predictions would be index funds in the stock market. So, you don't need some spiritual ability to "reason" or be "intelligent" to get good results from accumulating data (one could argue that by accumulating data from many humans we are already accumulating their reasoning capabilities and hopefully this way can exceed any individual one's).
Also this quote from the article:
Warren Hatch, the chief executive of Good Judgment, a forecasting company co-founded by Tetlock, said: “We expect AI will excel in certain categories of questions, like monthly inflation rates. For categories with sparse data that require more judgment, humans retain the edge. The main point for us is that the answer isn’t human or AI, but instead human and AI to get the best forecast possible as quickly as possible.”
-
Comment on Conservative activist Charlie Kirk shot and killed at Utah college event in ~society
Lobachevsky Link ParentYou should be able to agree that it is very easy not to cheer on a political murder of a person. And yet here we are. Where I'm from people live in way worse conditions than practically anyone in...In any case, you should be able to at least agree that the material wealth of the US doesn't necessarily translate to high quality of life for the plurality of its citizens. Many people don't see the ubiquity of goods and services as acceptable trade for the social costs of toxic civil discourse, volatile public and private safety, corrupt institutions, a weak social contract, etc. etc.
You should be able to agree that it is very easy not to cheer on a political murder of a person. And yet here we are. Where I'm from people live in way worse conditions than practically anyone in the US. If you're able to post online about your misgivings, you're privileged, I'm sorry to say. I understand that this is a very difficult thing to accept for someone who lives in the US, such is reality for anyone with a privilege, but just take my word for it as an outside independent observer whose experience of the world isn't limited to the first world liberal West. Moreover, I just find it a very poor excuse for a very simple bar - not cheering on a political murder.
-
Comment on Conservative activist Charlie Kirk shot and killed at Utah college event in ~society
Lobachevsky Link ParentThis is an incredible statement considering the most empathetic, kind and charitable people I've ever met always seem to come from a place of hardship, from countries torn by war or other...people who live under the constant psychological stress of the USA's current political landscape when the victim is someone who would have contributed to said stress in a not-insignificant way. People are human.
This is an incredible statement considering the most empathetic, kind and charitable people I've ever met always seem to come from a place of hardship, from countries torn by war or other destructive political and social events. Meanwhile citizens of the richest country on Earth are apparently incapable of not only showing the most basic of empathy, they're so consumed by their emotions that they're also not capable of not going on their expensive smartphones and posting their emotions all over the internet, that's just how horrible the conditions in modern day USA are. For the love of god have some perspective.
Makes sense that you don't see anything wrong with what is being said in this thread if that is how low of a standard you have for the commenters here. Just like how proclaiming Luigi as a hero being highly upvoted with very little pushback and me bringing it up in this thread again resulting in very little pushback also doesn't mean anything at all and I'm just chasing ghosts.
-
Comment on Conservative activist Charlie Kirk shot and killed at Utah college event in ~society
Lobachevsky Link ParentI didn't say "legal or ethical". I said "not deserving of an execution decided by 1 person". It's an incredibly low standard which is why it's weird to me that 90% of the thread cannot seem to...To boil it down to "saying things" is like saying the person who shouts "Fire!" in a movie theater to incite panic is just "saying things" when clearly that scenario isn't protected in the same way as saying other things. While I'm not arguing that Kirk was saying anything illegal, we also know that what is defined as legal or illegal isn't necessarily equating to the ethics behind the actions or words.
I didn't say "legal or ethical". I said "not deserving of an execution decided by 1 person". It's an incredibly low standard which is why it's weird to me that 90% of the thread cannot seem to apply it.
Where does the notion come from that you can post anything you want online and then exclusively decide exactly how people use it?
Plagiarism (taking things as is) is a very specific case that we forbid. What does this have to do with AI training? Moreover, for 10 years everyone was free to copy this content, save it on their computers, run algorithms, study that data, transform it, make it into something else, sell the results and it was fine. Why is AI training any different?