461–470 of 776 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the author is just mad people will be able to detect and filter out their AI slop writing in the future.
Gruber just hates any kind of EU regulation of US tech companies ever since they started making what he calls "product decisions" for Apple.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? I really don't understand this. Why can't a tech writer take a deep but neutral intellectual interest in something? Isn't it important that some do? Do people have to be stakeholders or clearly on one given team, pro- or anti-, for their opinion to matter? Is it that tribal? It seems fully logical to me that someone who writes for a living (who, as it happens, developed the very markup language LLMs use for ever…
> Why? I really don't understand this. Why can't a tech writer take a deep but neutral intellectual interest in something? Isn't it important that some do? Do people have to be stakeholders or clearly on one given team, pro- or anti-, for their opinion to matter? Is it that tribal? I don't think it's weird to ask that people commenting on x doing y with tech z at least try tech z, no? Imagine this pamphlet: Basting a…
On what specific basis do you assume he hasn't tried it? He's definitely blogged about the desktop apps, after all.
Or are you arguing that a writer doesn't have a meaningful or valid opinion on LLM-generated writing until they have tried to pass some off as their own?
This just seems weird to me. I mean, I have an opinion on this and I am personally never going to use an LLM to do published writing. On an intellectual level I can still see that there is nuance in it for others (for once I agree with him about an EU regulation).
My biggest concern is that checking any text for watermarks requires sending the entire text to Anthropic. And even that is not sufficient, as the text might have been generated with ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok, Mistral, ... So every check requires sending the text to as many AI providers as offer a watermarking detection API, almost all of which have a very dubious track history with obtaining training data through illici…
Doesn’t this mean Anthropic can accuse anyone of using their AI to write for them?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but mightn’t there be several plausible long horizon plans? Here’s an example: I had asked Claude for some music recommendations in a certain style. Part of its output was: — *Long journey tracks* Clinic — “The Return of Evil Bill” Guided by Voices — not really, wrong band Silver Apples — “Oscillations”. Proto-everything, deeply repetitive, hypnotic. — So at some point there, the next token produced was “Guided…
Would be fun to run an LLM on fake output from itself. Like just force the first N tokens to say the beginning of something really stupid, and then see how it finishes the sentence. "You're absolutely right! Human feces is actually the most effective engine coolant because $ "
I’m surprised by the comments here being so favorable to anthropic. The comments are right about there being no “best” token, and yeah Gruber may have an agenda here. But I think the fundamental principle is that this approach messes with the distribution in ways that deviate from the trained model. Take the “gray” and “overcast” choices. And lets say before applying synthid the percentages were 48% and 52%. Those pe…
I’m surprised by the comments here being so favorable to anthropic. The comments are right about there being no “best” token, and yeah Gruber may have an agenda here. But I think the fundamental principle is that this approach messes with the distribution in ways that deviate from the trained model. Take the “gray” and “overcast” choices. And lets say before applying synthid the percentages were 48% and 52%. Those pe…
I’m sure it matters. But how much does it matter? How much (perceived) intelligence would you be willing to sacrifice for an accurate AI predictor? I’d sacrifice a few %, easily. Maybe 10%. The models are getting smarter at such a fast rate that I’d be willing to lose a month or two of progress to help slow down the AI cheating epidemic. It sounds like you expect this fingerprinting approach would dramatically reduce…
Is the cheating epidemic so bad? I’m a little out of the loop there truthfully, what are the consequences of not being able to detect AI generated text in non academic settings? And in academic settings… maybe I am underestimating the challenge, but it does feel like the assignment and ways education happens needs to change?
As an aside, I’m not totally sure why this solution feels so icky to me. There’s something Orwellian about how the phrasing of a passage embeds hidden information that only Anthropic can see i guess
The real argument should be watermarking itself. I don’t want my shit water marked if I ask you to just rephrase a certain part.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Where is the problem with using LLM generated text? In the fact that you didn't write it. > You could use your own hypothetical house elf to do it for you, or pay someone to do it. Yes, and those would be similarly problematic (and more expensive).
> In the fact that you didn't write it. This is a fact and this is generally not a problem. Customer support guy Joe did not write that email to you with a refund: someone else did it and Joe did pick the template. Alice did not write that post card to Bob, someone else did and she just googled some nice text. We deal with a lot of content that wasn’t written by the person who signed it. That content, when written by…
In case of the former, there is a problem worth solving.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the people who are annoyed at FLAC vs MP3 What’s the story there? I didn’t know that was a thing and I’m curious to learn more.
MP3 is lossy. FLAC is lossless. So obviously a certain type of people are going to make a religious war out of it.
Flac takes a raw .wav and effectively zips it up to shave off a certain amount of space. (there are nuances, I think the compression scheme is designed for streaming.)
mp3 is perceptual, so throws away the stuff that humans can't hear. This yields a much smaller file.
However its all a sliding scale like PNG vs jpeg.
a .jpg with a quality setting of 85 will be almost identical to a .png in visual quality. However if you then edit that jpeg, the image degrades and you start to see artifacts. (hence why memes look like shite as they get older)
Its the same with mp3s if you compress the hell out of them, say 64kbit or lower adaptive, then you'll start to hear the tell tail "schlop" noise of mp3-like compression. You might notice it most with cymbals in drum kits. cymbals are wideband noise. as in there are loads of constituent frequencies so if you remove some of the "hidden" frequencies you tend to notice, so they sound more metallic, ironically.
But, all of this is solvable, 256+kbit is more than enough, bonus points for higher sampling frequencies. (however you need a decoder that can actually do that sample rate...)