Notices by mnml mnl (he/him) (mnl@hachyderm.io)

@lain @sofia what about selling people on the concept that the machine could do it better, when it kind of can't? Or if it was the case that a human + the machine could do way better.

@lain @sofia yeah i meant more like "let's fire research assistants and replace them with AI". Maybe not the best analogy here.

@lain @sofia So much of the use-cases really depend on the context. For example, I build many "automate this job entirely", say, writing SEO titles. Because I work for a family business, that means that Joe can now, instead of grinding through 5000 SEO titles, do more product photography.

But, I could also build "fire all content writers" machine, with the same prompt.

@sofia yes. Calling for a lock down of training data based on copyright law would be a terrible thing for opensource models, imo. There's also a lot of research that goes into generated datasets and just curating leads to much better training results.

@sofia like i'm perfectly fine ethically with training my own model on the entirety of all papers in libgen... As long as I don't create the "replace a scientist machine". And while I take openai's stance with a pretty big grain of salt, they aren't (compared to midjourney, say), pushing for the "let's replace people" model, and provide tools to remove your self from the training corpus.

FWIW, lip service does a fair amount here and is not in the headlines.

@sofia i'm really taken aback by the copyright stan-isation of the countercultural debate here, as if the nytimes was a defender of the rights of individual journalists. No, if they were to train their own model on their journalists output they would go ahead, just like adobe and shutterstock and co.

openai paying nytimes licensing fees won't change anything for the better.

https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/

If you ask me gpt-3 should have been the wake-up call.

#chatgpt #llms

Boosting this again: the future of life institute has an open letter asking for a 6 months pause on training more powerful LLMs to focus on oversight, governance and safety.

I am not worried about AGI but it is clear to me that we haven’t even scratched the surface of what *GPT3* can do, since that is the model I’m most often working with.

What openAI and co are doing is throwing oil on the fire and unconscionable. Of course 75% of the HN comments are asking for just that.

#chatgpt #llms

I wish there was some kind of Wikileaks platform where people could upload the entire engineering data for obsolete products. Gimme those data sheets and pcb layouts and cad files and firmwares and bootloaders so I can actually fix my old mp3 player or use that old nest as a kickass volume knob.

#solarpunk

Spotify: 25000 people listened to your album, we’ll never tell you who they are and how they found you! Here’s $1.74.

Bandcamp: 30 people bought your album and left a comment! Here’s $250.

inspired by @elan we started brainstorming ideas to suggest accessibility capitalization when typing hashtags. kind of a tricky problem, and here is my first take on it, using the aho corasick algorithm as implemented by https://github.com/BobuSumisu/aho-corasick.

My hack code is here:
https://github.com/wesen/majuscule

You can try it out for the evening (running on a single core on my laptop, hopefully it won't crash): https://6f0d-108-7-201-60.ngrok.io

Get in touch if you want to help!

#accessibility #golang #algorithms #nlp

@aral @akareilly @peter @stevenbodzin @futurebird what is condescending is preaching that large scale communication is all wanting to be a rockstar center stage.

Not only is wanting to be a rockstar center stage a totally valid goal, but it is missing a whole host of valid and empowering conceptions and uses of social media.

To use a soapbox to preach to others to not use a soapbox is weird.

@aral what do you actually want, I am genuinely confused?

That the person would have replied on the original thread? That the person would have anonymized your name, the way you are doing it? That they should have used a link not a screenshot? Or just that no one gets snarky about your hot takes?

Instead of replying to that person as you advocate, you are pandering to your audience. That’s totally fine by me, but you can’t have it both ways.