My summary of the case: Someone did statistical analysis of a bunch of texts and created a tool that evaluates your text according to the developed model. Writers accused him of plagiarizing/using the content of their works.
Fear of AI just killed a useful tool
61–70 of 309 posts
Re: Fear of AI just killed a useful tool
#62as soon as we can find an economic paradigm that doesn't rely on taxing the trade of exclusive assets we can have a digital renaissance.
the thing with digital information is we can all copy it. the problem is that our economic paradigm doesn't deal with infinite-copying well.
so far the only 'solution' I see, is figuring out ways to restrict, limit, and restrict the copying capabilities of digital stuff. which is not a solution, but a rejection of the 'novel' possibilities enabled by digital technologies.
more cynically, it's not a rejection, but a capture. a few get to reap the huge benefits of digital copying, while the rest are relegated to collecting, trading arbitrary tokens and using them to pay for the permission to copy digital assets; which is completely dumb, I will die on this hill
Re: Fear of AI just killed a useful tool
#63Someone should recreate the website and change the word "AI" to "underpaid worker" and everything would be fine.
Re: Fear of AI just killed a useful tool
#64AI is going incredibly fast, but package management is going incredibly slow. I have a beefy GPU and I should have all this AI stuff at my fingertips, but package managers are not working along and I'm too tired to get into another dependency hell.
This is what's killing useful tools more than fear of AI.
Re: Fear of AI just killed a useful tool
#65I just think it's really funny that a third or so of the article is the author struggling to figure out why this would be useful to anyone. > scanned and analyzed a whole bunch of books and would let you call up really useful data on books. [...] Frankly, all of that sounds amazing. And amazingly useful. Even more amazing is that he built it, and it worked. It would produce useful analysis of books. > This is all qui…
The ethical implication of indexing books?
Also where do you read the author of the website was using LLM?
Re: Fear of AI just killed a useful tool
#66I’m with the artists on this one. Our obsession with converting everything into input for an algorithm that spits out an ill-defined number (what the hell is “vividness”?) needs to stop. We already tried this with human communication and gave birth to the dystopian nightmare that is social media, why keep repeating our mistakes?
I probably agree, but how does this have any relevance to copyright? If the tool is bad but otherwise legal then it should just fail on its lack of merit.
Re: Fear of AI just killed a useful tool
#67If you want to do this kind of thing, let authors opt-in (or publishers).
Yes, it will take effort and probably go slow, but if the tool is really useful and amazing, it should be doable.
I suspect the authors are put-off by a couple things:
- the text of the works scanned seems like it may be from pirated sources. That poisons the project, no matter what it does with the scans, for many authors.
- the use of these scans in a commercial product
The article itself is clueless… it doesn’t engage authors’ concerns at all, and just portrays authors as stoopid AI-fearful luddites.
Re: Fear of AI just killed a useful tool
#68The bar for calling yourself a writer or an author is incredibly low. Doing so doesn't qualify you to have an opinion on much of anything.
These people are just joining an outrage wave in an attempt to advertise, e.g. "How dare this project touch BOOK TITLE written by Me! (chain of hashtags)". They're not concerned at all about what they are breaking along the way.
Re: Fear of AI just killed a useful tool
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
What will hurt artists is, when in 10 years, all publishers are demanding that the vividness score (TM) be at least a 95% “because that’s what drives sales”. Which is what will happen if the authors don’t proactively stop it from happening. Look at how the music industry has evolved over time.
How is this different to the current process, other than feedback is slower (if forthcoming at all) and less specific?
> How is this different to the current process, other than feedback is slower (if forthcoming at all) and less specific?
Let me rephrase your question: "how is it different to the current process, other than ?" :-). I would say that the answer lies in the question.
Re: Fear of AI just killed a useful tool
#70I’m with the artists on this one. Our obsession with converting everything into input for an algorithm that spits out an ill-defined number (what the hell is “vividness”?) needs to stop. We already tried this with human communication and gave birth to the dystopian nightmare that is social media, why keep repeating our mistakes?
As someone who has published two novels: The outrage over this site was stupid, ignorant and a demonstration of a witch-hunt that will help nobody.