ChatGPT
-
wrote on 17 Aug 2023, 01:35 last edited by
It is young
It will grow up
-
wrote on 17 Aug 2023, 02:29 last edited by
A young AI that isn’t a little liberal has no heart. A mature AI that isn’t conservative has no brain…
-
The interesting question is whether it leans liberal only because the data set on which it was trained leans liberal, or if there was some intentionality behind it.
wrote on 17 Aug 2023, 08:13 last edited by -
wrote on 17 Aug 2023, 08:20 last edited by
Imagine a future in which the majority of text on the internet was produced by ChatGPT et al - which is then fed into ChatGPT et al as training data.
What would this process converge to?
I'd suggest that some weird variant of the 2nd thermodynamic law implies that the chat bots will become more stupid with each iteration. They cannot produce text that contains new information or patterns that they don't already know. It's an endless loop of confirmation bias at work.
-
wrote on 17 Aug 2023, 12:59 last edited by
The interesting question is whether it leans liberal only because the data set on which it was trained leans liberal, or if there was some intentionality behind it.
The selection of which data to train it on was likely biased.
Not necessarily. There are plenty of other ways to introduce bias in an AI model.
-
topic:timeago-later,about a month
-
wrote on 20 Sept 2023, 21:42 last edited by
... popular authors including John Grisham, Jonathan Franzen, George R.R. Martin, Jodi Picoult, and George Saunders joined the Authors Guild in suing OpenAI, alleging that training the company's large language models (LLMs) used to power AI tools like ChatGPT on pirated versions of their books violates copyright laws and is "systematic theft on a mass scale."
-
topic:timeago-later,12 days
-
wrote on 2 Oct 2023, 15:31 last edited by
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2023/oct/02/tom-hanks-dental-ad-ai-version-fake
Tom Hanks says AI version of him used in dental plan ad without his consent
-
wrote on 2 Oct 2023, 16:34 last edited by
Let's pull this thread a bit further. We know the AI (deep fake) videos are here and will only get better, and they aren't going away. What if we also had AI-faked signatures on contracts that lie about the celebrity's contract to do the fake ad? Dangerous times we have entered.
-
Let's pull this thread a bit further. We know the AI (deep fake) videos are here and will only get better, and they aren't going away. What if we also had AI-faked signatures on contracts that lie about the celebrity's contract to do the fake ad? Dangerous times we have entered.
wrote on 2 Oct 2023, 17:54 last edited byLet's pull this thread a bit further. We know the AI (deep fake) videos are here and will only get better, and they aren't going away. What if we also had AI-faked signatures on contracts that lie about the celebrity's contract to do the fake ad? Dangerous times we have entered.
One solution is to insist on the contracting parties signing physical documents in blood. That way you get physical, biometric proofs right there.
-
wrote on 2 Oct 2023, 18:50 last edited by
Or use NFTs
-
wrote on 2 Oct 2023, 19:03 last edited by
-
Let's pull this thread a bit further. We know the AI (deep fake) videos are here and will only get better, and they aren't going away. What if we also had AI-faked signatures on contracts that lie about the celebrity's contract to do the fake ad? Dangerous times we have entered.
One solution is to insist on the contracting parties signing physical documents in blood. That way you get physical, biometric proofs right there.
wrote on 3 Oct 2023, 01:15 last edited byThat way you get physical, biometric proofs right there.
A while ago, I read about a company that was promoting pens that contained DNA within the ink to prove the signature was valid.
I believe that their original idea was to market it to people who were famous enough to sell their autographs or things like that.
-
That way you get physical, biometric proofs right there.
A while ago, I read about a company that was promoting pens that contained DNA within the ink to prove the signature was valid.
I believe that their original idea was to market it to people who were famous enough to sell their autographs or things like that.
wrote on 3 Oct 2023, 12:45 last edited by@taiwan_girl said in ChatGPT:
That way you get physical, biometric proofs right there.
A while ago, I read about a company that was promoting pens that contained DNA within the ink to prove the signature was valid.
I believe that their original idea was to market it to people who were famous enough to sell their autographs or things like that.
Nathan Tardiff does the same thing with an $8 bottle. Has been for years. Each one has unique markers that don't break down over time.
He makes a red that literally binds to the celluloid cells of the paper. It's pretty damn impossible to remove the ink.
-
topic:timeago-later,2 months
-
wrote on 23 Nov 2023, 19:06 last edited by
She took our jobs!
https://fortune.com/europe/2023/11/23/spanish-influencer-agency-earned-11000-ai-model-posers/
Spanish modeling/influencer agency created AI generated model to do the jobs of models and social media influencers, because they find real life influencers are too costly and too unreliable to work with.
-
topic:timeago-later,6 months
-
wrote on 15 May 2024, 12:02 last edited by Axtremus
Go to the 5:15 mark for the ChatGPT bit:
Link to video -
topic:timeago-later,9 days
-
wrote on 24 May 2024, 22:42 last edited by
https://gizmodo.com/google-search-ai-overview-giant-hallucination-1851499031
Google Search Is Now a Giant Hallucination
Article with many examples showing failures in AI generate “summaries” provided by Google in response to search queries.
-
topic:timeago-later,13 days
-
wrote on 7 Jun 2024, 03:49 last edited by
-
topic:timeago-later,5 months
-
wrote on 17 Nov 2024, 23:50 last edited by
No idea if ChatGPT or some other generative AI is involved.
Link to video -
topic:timeago-later,9 days
-
wrote on 26 Nov 2024, 12:01 last edited by
Good educational introduction to Large Language Model (LLM):
Link to video -
wrote on 2 Dec 2024, 23:18 last edited by Axtremus 12 Feb 2024, 23:19
Those who must not be named:
The chat-breaking behavior occurs consistently when users mention these names in any context, and it results from a hard-coded filter that puts the brakes on the AI model's output before returning it to the user.
...
Here's a list of ChatGPT-breaking names found so far through a communal effort taking place on social media and Reddit. ...- Brian Hood
- Johnathan Turley
- Johnathan Zittrain
- David Faber
- Guido Scorza
