Jimmycrackcrack @ Jimmycrackcrack @lemmy.ml

Posts

34

Comments

863

Joined

2 yr. ago

Do you know that they didn't?

Sure, great, but HOW? At the moment at least when a desire is held to profit from written work generated by AI, that desire and motivation comes from a human being. If the Authors Guild wants to confirm that a human being wrote something by basically communicating with that human about the work then they have no way to reliably determine if the human they're talking to generated it by writing down their thoughts or instructing an LLM.

If the quality level from AI work is similar enough to a traditionally written work that the text on its own doesn't clearly indicate machine authorship then the fact of the submission process and the communication between a human being and the Authors Guild could really be the only means by which this is done. So basically, charm them enough and now your AI generated text output could gain extra legitimacy courtesy the Authors Guild because it's now not just you implying you wrote it, it's the respected Authors Guild outright stating it isn't AI.

It also puts in to question some assumptions about this whole endeavour as well. If it's not a quality guarantee, only provenance, as in it can be bad writing but the Authors Guild attests it's bad human writing, then assumptions like "One cannot relate to a bot that does not have its own lived experiences to share" are undermined since that will only hold true on the basis of knowledge the reader has about the text, rather than the text itself resonating with the reader because human generated writing is inherently superior. If that knowledge can be so easily corrupted, it's worthless or at least only a couple of scandals away from being made so. It also gets very messy with things like the example they gave of KC Crowne whose book accidentally included some of the conversation they had evidently had with an LLM while writing the book. It is a hilarious smoking gun that the author used AI tools in the process of their writing, but funny as that is, the mistakenly included text shows that they're at least directing the output and seem to be using the AI to help them refine and make changes to their own writing. They're at least engaging in some form of process beyond simply commanding the machine to generate a book and then selling the result. Defence of 'AI artists' along similar lines to what I just laid out has been sharply criticised and that's pretty justified, right now at least, few would call this idea of directing the output of an LLM, this 'prompt engineering', the same thing as writing, but then again is this a question of degree? Or an absolute? Does the degree to which the author has apparently leaned on this tool affect how much value it has lost to a reader? If the mistakenly included prompt indicates that the author constructed their entire story through prompting, the illusion that the author created this work by synthesising and relating their own experiences is shattered but if it just indicates that they sometimes used it to work through problems while they wrote, is the connection to the author just as sullied, or now only partially? Or not at all? If the Authors Guild accept a submission and put their stamp attesting to its human provenance and later find out that for portions of the text the author consulted with chatGPT to help them work through ideas and test out other approaches are they going to revoke the inclusion in their database? Or is that only if its completely AI generated? In any case whatever answer they have for that can only apply to cases where they know exactly how or if any of the widely available AI tools were used.

With that kind of hit rate and timescale did you ever think the apps were unnecessary vs just meeting people? Or were you not really in a position to meet people by other means anyway?

Here in Australia Trump puts us in an awkward position. For a long time we've meshed our interests with those of the US both necessarily and very much unnecessarily. Some say we're the 51st state. This makes the increasing power of the US' executive branch over the past 2-3 decades and the decision to put a joke candidate with the mind of a child in charge of that branch particularly worrying. Our politicians did what you'd expect and more or less refused to make much comment about this and publicly and emphasised the strength of our relationship with the US and how we'll work with the incoming administration like any other. Unfortunately though we couldn't really avoid being hit by some of the whirling shitstorm going on over there.

Last time he got his knickers in a knot about a refugee deal from the previous administration where we'd send refugees headed to Australia, to the US. I have to provide some context for that to make sense so I'll be as brief as I can. I'll just point out that this deal was the crowning capitulation on top of about 15 years or so of absolute bullshit xenophobia and cruelty on behalf of our successive governments who used refugees as political pawns and entered into a brinkmanship of which party could more cruel. For most of that time the public enthusiastically cheered them on but around the time of Trump's presidency there'd finally been a seachange and the government of the day found themselves needing to avoid allowing refugees in to the country or be accused of no longer believing in cruelty to refugees as policy whilst also needing to seem maybe not quite so cruel anymore so they tried to make it the rest of the world's problem instead by finding other countries to dump them in. This mostly involved Papua New Guinea who they paid to take them but who had little capacity to do so and also, but also a small handful of them to the US to try and take the sting out of some of the criticism about dumping them all in PNG where the locals were already threatening violence against them.

Obviously this deal would look bad for Trump given his politics. Known for his tendency to try to solve problems by personally throwing a tantrum at people, he did just that to our Prime Minister at the time in a phone call. That Prime Minister wasn't, nor really is anyone else in our political system, known for his backbone or courage but nevertheless the leaked phone call seems to show that while he was mostly confused and bewildered by Trump's directness and stupidity, to his credit he still didn't give him what he wanted which was a demand to immediately cancel the deal. You could say he stood his ground, I personally think he was more just confused about what to do next probably because I assume politics doesn't usually work that way and they'd normally operate through technocrats and underlings on anything of consequence rather than deranged phone calls but however you look at it he didn't concede and the only consequence was that Trump had a big public sissy fit, that he somehow didn't realise made him look even weaker, and then he just moved on to the next mess of his own making in the 20 minutes it likely took him to make it.

Basically, by that example I want to highlight that, though he is a threat, he does make things hard for us, and in general, long term, moves need to made to begin the long path of finding ways to live without such dependence upon the US, the good thing about Trump is also much of what makes him bad. He's a baby, he's got a very short attention span, and he doesn't like it when he can't win quickly by just throwing a tantrum and so it appears that when he indeed can't, he has a little cry about it and then seems to just kind of move on and pretend he was never interested in the first place. This is a kind of silver lining because it seems like you can pretty much just ignore the dumbest of his statements and just try to put out smaller diplomatic and economic fires as he creates them. We're still in a pretty shitty position here though because we're so interwoven with the US culturally, economically and as far as defence is concerned entirely, that trying to untangle from that is going to be really complicated and long term and looks near impossible. Unfortunately the chickens are coming home to roost on some seriously dumb and unimaginative decisions for 30 plus years.

The printed sign with the broken English seems to indicate that even their stickering eventually couldn't keep up with the pace of their price increases and they eventually had to just say they're going to charge a different price than what's on the screen. The fact that the business seems to be closed down adds a sad coda to their story.

I don't know that that would have been better oddly enough. At least not without specific plain English references to which particular lies and from whom they came. The problem with your more fiery poetic version is that people will simply assume the liars and oath breakers being referred to are just whoever their particular ideological opponents are so it could easily be dodged by assuming they're just calling out someone else.

"Simplicity is key, a good cut of beef, salt, pepper and olive oil". Ironically I suspect that, despite it being steak and being posted by a woman talking about cooking, such a post would still cop a lot of flack and trigger a lot of the type of people that would choose to use Truth Social because of the mention of seed oil over animal fat.

At thumbnail scale this particular one also resembles a very tasty looking bread roll.

Re-aducation

Is there any progress towards marrying these different fediverse services together so I could use my Lemmy account on any of them? Is this a goal at all?

Been like 8 years I kind of thought it would be a little different but the if it ain't broke don't fix it approach has made a lot of money for people in the past I suppose.

Neither did wii for that matter.

This seems like it makes sense on at least 2 levels, either because he's saying he at some point had the 'woke mind virus' and deleted it, or more likely he's saying this is what people need to do to 'free' themselves of the 'woke mind virus'.

You don't have to endorse it to understand it. I don't really understand Hazel's confusion.

I'd like that too, but I don't know how to program so it'd turn out to be a pretty cruel joke. I'd need that plus access to interdimensional internet so I could download scripts and be a scriptkiddy of reality.

Isn't divine powers all of these?

I loved that controller I think it's such a shame it's so universally panned. Don't get me wrong, I wish it had dual sticks and I also wish the stupid main joystick wasn't built such that it breaks terribly from normal use, I also would have appreciated if they hadn't put those stupid ridged rings on the stick that shred up your skin, but I still think it was really innovative and fun to use and for the most part, pretty comfortable including it's alternate mode of operation with the D-pad.

do what you love and you'll never work a day in your life

What's a shizo?

This is interesting, I hadn't really considered this. Is my phone connected to its own hotspot? Obviously it's connected to data, but then I thought the hotspot was a means of the phone broadcasting that data for other devices to connect to it so I didn't think my phone itself would be connected to that network since it sort of IS the network. Assuming they ran some kind of script and exploited a vulnerability, are there general things I should be doing? I haven't noticed unusual banking activity. It's been only one day so hard to say if there's a broader identity theft thing going on.

Let's hope they never start counting all the times you jacked it.