The point about emotional response is good. I'm not sure how to best describe it, but every time I interact with AI, there is very little emotional response from it. Rather it's a "good enough" response rather than a sense of awe or horror. I've been experimenting with writing recently and wanting to provide some AI imagery to match the emotions I'm expressing. A painting like "Wanderer above the Sea of Fog" evokes m…
Certified 100% AI-free organic content
151–160 of 275 posts
Re: Certified 100% AI-free organic content
#152> Published content will be later used to train subsequent models, and being able to distinguish AI from human input may be very valuable going forward I find this to be a particularly interesting problem in this whole debacle. Could we end up having AI quality trend downwards due to AI ingesting its own old outputs and reinforcing bad habits? I think it's a particular risk for text generation. I've already run into…
Every discussion on AI take the example of ChatGPT and its inherent flaws but AI-generated content doesn't have to be dull and low quality.
One question that bother me is does it really matter? If AI-generated content is on par with Human-made or even better does it matter anymore that an AI generated it?
Maybe it's the sentimental value, empathy, fidelity?
If an AI had written Mozart's Requiem would it lessen its interest, its beauty?
Re: Certified 100% AI-free organic content
#153Re: Certified 100% AI-free organic content
#154I was thinking about this exact problem a few days ago when I created a site hosting poems that were either 100% AI written, or 100% Human. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34472478 Then I asked people to guess the authorship. Amazingly, only 70% of the time the guess people make is correct. https://random-poem.com/ why : Is this Poem written by or by ? Guess & Click. I'm guessing it will get even harder to tell…
"ridicolously"
Re: Certified 100% AI-free organic content
#155Re: Certified 100% AI-free organic content
#156There is so much stuffing for a simple idea that I'm not sure if this piece deserves its own title, but I'll give it the benefit of the doubt. One thing that I wonder though is how we will draw the line. If I'm writing a piece and do a Google search, and in that way invoke BERT under the hood, is anything that I write afterwards "AI-tainted"? What about the grammar checker? Or the spot removal tool in photoshop or gi…
>One thing that I wonder though is how we will draw the line. If I'm writing a piece and do a Google search, and in that way invoke BERT under the hood, is anything that I write afterwards "AI-tainted"? What about the grammar checker? Or the spot removal tool in photoshop or gimp? Or the AI voice that reads back to me my own article so that I can find prose issues? >And that brings the other problem: do the general p…
The humans running those processes can attempt to deny ownership or responsibility if they so choose but whenever it matters such as in law or any other arena dealing with liability or ownership rights, the humans will be made to own the responsibility.
Same as for self-driving cars. We can debate about who the operator is and to what extent the manufacturers, the occupants, or the owners are responsible for whether the car causes harm but we'll never try to punish the car while calling all humans involved blameless. The point of holding people responsible for outcomes and actions is to drive meaningful change in human behaviors in order to reduce harms and encourage human flourishing.
In terms of ownership and intellectual property, again the point of even having rules is to manage interactions between humans so we can behave civilly towards each other. There can be no meaningful category of content produced "100%" by AI unless AI become persons under the law or as considered by most humans.
If an AI system can ever truly produce content on its own volition, without any human action taken to make that specific thing happen, then that system would be a rational actor on par with other persons and we'll probably begin the debate over whether AI systems should be treated as people in society and under the law. That may even be a new category distinct from human persons such as it is with the concept of corporate persons.
Re: Certified 100% AI-free organic content
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
My guess is that ChatGPT is going to solve the SEO spam problem by changing the way we search for things. Instead of searching for webpages that have information about a topic, we're going to ask an AI. It'll tell you what the pros and cons of wedding insurance are, and because eventually it'll have access to your calendar, it'll tailor that answers to the specifics of the fact that you're having a destination weddin…
I've already had the SEO guy at work ask me how we might go about influencing model output. What a time to be alive.
Re: Certified 100% AI-free organic content
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, this is ChatGPT, not Copilot, so I'd assume that OP was looking for a snippet using a public library rather than an internal API. In that context, suggesting you use an API that doesn't exist is just wrong. I've definitely done this with Copilot, though—it will suggest an API that doesn't actually exist but logically should in order to be consistent, and I'll go create it.
That seems more like misplaced expectations. Someone may have given you the impression that copilot was supposed to do things like that where that expectation seems to not be present for you in relation to ChatGPT. However, as far as I know, the OpenAI team has not made it a goal to have ChatGPT only produce functional code using existing APIs. So I'm not sure we can call that an incorrect answer based on context. If…
The difference I was drawing between ChatGPT and Copilot wasn't that Copilot has functionality ChatGPT doesn't, it's that it has context ChatGPT doesn't, so it suggests things related to internal APIs. In a conversation with ChatGPT it would be very difficult to get help with internal APIs, hence my assumption that OP wasn't referring to APIs they have any control over.
Re: Certified 100% AI-free organic content
#159> Published content will be later used to train subsequent models, and being able to distinguish AI from human input may be very valuable going forward I find this to be a particularly interesting problem in this whole debacle. Could we end up having AI quality trend downwards due to AI ingesting its own old outputs and reinforcing bad habits? I think it's a particular risk for text generation. I've already run into…