Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

15.ai

15.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 192 posts

Re: 15.ai

#81

Post by sillysaurusx »

jameshart wrote: post #60
sillysaurusx wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So “Only if you’re OpenAI” :) If the weights were public, the community would figure out a way to fine tune it.

It’s not a matter of ‘figuring out’. The model supports fine tuning. It’s a core feature of the openai API. Running ‘fine tuned’ versions of GPT-3 that are created by customers is literally their SaaS model. They have examples in the documentation. Here: https://help.openai.com/en/articles/5528730-fine-tuning-a-cl...

I get that. But you don’t get the weights. Which means they limit what you can and can’t generate.

A friend of mine was going to build a writing assistant on top of GPT-3. She got a lot of encouragement from them. Then one day the social media storm hit OpenAI, and suddenly safety became a non-negotiable feature of their api. And along with that came the restriction “absolutely no products that can generate unlimited amounts of text, even if you can pay for the credits.”

Poof, no more business.

Imagine buying a keyboard that restricted what you could type.

All of these problems go away when you have access to the weights.

Re: 15.ai

#82

Post by apeace »

Kind of off-topic but... I clicked the "Random sample text" button and was given this:

> OOPSIE WOOPSIE! Uwu. We made a fucky wucky! A wittle fucko boingo!

I was a bit taken aback because I'd never seen this meme before. So I looked it up and I found the origins of it pretty funny: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/oopsie-woopsie

Also, hearing the voice of Spongebob saying that really brightened my day. Bravo, MIT.

Re: 15.ai

#84

Post by [deleted] »

tesrx wrote: post #72
sophiebits wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weird, I read through the text because I care about how I’m allowed to use the things people are giving me – and by the time I got to the Accept button, it was enabled.

I guess the creator added that specifically for the YouTubers and TikTokers who failed to credit the site: https://twitter.com/fifteenai/status/1522289980420337666

[deleted]

Re: 15.ai

#85

Post by noobermin »

deeplearner1 wrote: post #46
forrestthewoods wrote: post #41

The copyright laws around this are fascinating. They're adamant it must be non-commercial, they must be credited, and it can't be mixed with any other generated content. Meanwhile their content is exclusively derived from popular commercial products. Oh and they also make money via Patreon donations. I dunno. Feels a little gross to me. Eventually there is going to be a big copyright case about a model trained with c…

“Make money”? The creator loses several thousands of dollars a month hosting the site, and it’s done for free. The Patreon donations are all voluntary and only offer a pittance to the developer. I highly suggest reading into the project first. The Wiki article I linked before ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15.ai ) answers all of your questions about copyright infringement.

I heavily doubt it's "several thousands of dollars"...

Re: 15.ai

#86

Post by gwern »

julianeon wrote: post #53
deeplearner1 wrote: post #40

If you want more information about 15.ai, I highly suggest reading their Wikipedia article! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15.ai The whole history behind the project is fascinating: 4chan had a huge role in its development, and the project's work was stolen by an NFT company that a famous voice actor endorsed not too long ago.

Ah, I was wondering why they were so concerned about attribution. The truth is that, today, if I was going to use a tool to generate voices (say for YouTube), I wouldn't necessarily pick a small SaaS tool. I'd use Amazon Polly or some other GCP-style platform voice creation tool. There are already a few products in the space, and their costs are so low as to be almost negligible (example: Polly, 5 million characters…

15-kun has always been fanatical about attribution; the plagiarism just made him more so.

Re: 15.ai

#87

Post by rockemsockem »

julianeon wrote: post #53
deeplearner1 wrote: post #40

If you want more information about 15.ai, I highly suggest reading their Wikipedia article! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15.ai The whole history behind the project is fascinating: 4chan had a huge role in its development, and the project's work was stolen by an NFT company that a famous voice actor endorsed not too long ago.

Ah, I was wondering why they were so concerned about attribution. The truth is that, today, if I was going to use a tool to generate voices (say for YouTube), I wouldn't necessarily pick a small SaaS tool. I'd use Amazon Polly or some other GCP-style platform voice creation tool. There are already a few products in the space, and their costs are so low as to be almost negligible (example: Polly, 5 million characters…

Polly and GCP's voices still sound a tad robotic though unfortunately :/

15.ai seems to beat them on some sentences, but not all. Looking forward to the day when we can have real human-level quality of voices on-demand.

Re: 15.ai

#88

Post by rockemsockem »

nope96 wrote: post #33

Oh god, 50 shades of SpongePants. The future is wild in ways I never imagined. Star Trek style holodecks in what, 15 years? So, creepy thought: should we be recording audio of our parents, so we can still "hear from them" once in a while after they die? People are going to want to reconstruct their lost loved ones with AI. This project seems to imply you only need an hour or so of audio.

Sounds like a pretty unhealthy thing to do TBH :/

Re: 15.ai

#89

Post by fny »

The use of emojis to determine sentiment is incredibly clever.

> The DeepThroat model is able to generate voices of varying degrees of emotion despite never having been exposed to emotive data of the character during training. Furthermore, multiple characters can be trained simultaneously, significantly reducing the amount of time required compared to if one were to train the character models individually.

Can't wait to read the paper.

Re: 15.ai

#90

Post by faitswulff »

fny wrote: post #89

The use of emojis to determine sentiment is incredibly clever. > The DeepThroat model is able to generate voices of varying degrees of emotion despite never having been exposed to emotive data of the character during training. Furthermore, multiple characters can be trained simultaneously, significantly reducing the amount of time required compared to if one were to train the character models individually. Can't wait…

That's interesting, I wonder if it can account for any drifts in meaning across generations: https://www.wsj.com/articles/sending-a-smiley-face-make-sure...
Post reply on HN