• 2 Posts
  • 13 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: March 17th, 2024

help-circle

  • Interested in astronomy you say? Well mander.xyz describe themselves as a “An instance dedicated to nature and science.”. They have a astronomy community with, some activity - !astronomy@mander.xyz. I’m not on mander so I don’t know how things are there, but I pretty much don’t ever see anyone complaining about it.

    feddit.uk is a UK instance. So there might be some interesting things there for you.

    lemmy.ee is known for not defederating unless absolutely necessary.

    On the topic of defederating, lemmy.world is somewhat disliked due to their defederation happy tendencies. For the most part, though, this whole instance wars thing is mostly due to disagreements on what kind of political discourse should be allowed. Instances like lemmygrad.ml, hexbear.net and lemmy.ml are a bit too left-wing for many people from the center-right to handle: the world views are just too different.

    I could rant about the dam instance wars, but it is not what you came were for.


  • AI art being inherently “plagiarising”

    Yes it is, simply due to the nature of the “training”/“learning” process, which is learning in name alone. If you know how this mathematical process works you know the machine’s definition of success is how well it’s output matches the data it was trained with. The machine is effectively trying to encrypt it’s data base on it’s nodes. I would recommend you inform yourself on how the “training” process actually works, down to the mathematical level.

    AI using as much energy’s crypto , the AI = crypto mindset in general

    AI is often push by the same people who pushed NFTs and whatnot, so this is somewhat understandable. And yes, AI consumes a lot of energy and water. Maybe not as much as crypto, but still, not something we can afford to use for mindless entertainment in our current climate catastrophe.

    AI art “having no soul”

    Yup. AI “art” works by finding pixel patterns that repeat with a given token. Due to it’s nature, it can only repeat patterns which it identified in it’s training data. Now, we have all heard of the saying “An image in worth a thousand words”. This saying is quite the understatement. For one to describe an image down to the last detail, such detail that someone who never saw the image could perfectly replicate it, one how need more than a thousand words, as evidenced by computer image files, since these are basically what was just described. The training data never has enough detail to describe the whole image in such detail and therefore it is incapable of doing anything too specific.

    Art is very personal, the more of yourself you put into a piece, the more unique and “soulful” it will be. The more of the work you delegate to the machine, the less of yourself you can put into the piece, and if 100% of the image generation was made by the machine, which is in turn simply calculating an average image that matches the prompt, then nothing of you is in the piece. It is nothing more than the maths that created it.

    Simple text descriptions do not give the human meaningful control over the final piece, and that is why pretty much any artist worth their tittle is not using it.

    Also, the irony that we are automating the arts, something which people enjoy doing, instead of the soul degrading jobs nobody wants to do, should not be lost on us.

    “Peops use AI to do «BAD THING» , therefour AI ISZ THE DEVILLLL ‼‼‼”

    It is true that AI is being used in horrible was that will take sometime to adapt, it is simply that the negative usages of AI have more visibility than the positive usages. As a matter of fact, this node network technology was already in use in many fields before the Chat-GPT induced AI hype train.

    can’t trust anti AI peops to actually criticise the tech

    Correct. It is well known that those who stem to financially benefit from the success of AI are more than willing to lie about it’s true capabilities.




  • I should have been more clear. I meant “The federalized nature of Mastodon seems to be its biggest obstacle to it achieving mass adoption”.

    The post was about why Mastodon isn’t receiving as many user as BlueSky, or in other words, why it isn’t achieving mass adoption. It was under this context that I chose to use the word “flaw”, as in, flaw towards reaching mass adoption.





  • I don’t think you understand exactly how theses machines work. The machine does not “learn”, it does not extract meaning from the tokens it receives. Here is one way to look at it

    Suppose you have a sequence of symbols: ¹§ŋ¹§ŋ¹§ŋ¹§ŋ And then were given a fragment of a sequence and asked to guess what you be the most likely symbol to follow it: ¹§ Think you could do it? I’m sure you would have no trouble solving this example. But could you make a machine that could reliably accomplish this task, regardless of the sequence of symbols and regardless of the fragment given? Let’s imagine you did manage to create such a marvellous machine.

    If given a large sequence of symbols spanning multiple books of length would you say this pattern recognition machine is able to create anything original? No… Because it is simply trying to copy it’s original sequence as closely as possible.

    Another question: Would this machine ever derive meaning from this symbols? No… How could it?

    But what if I told you that these symbols weren’t just symbols: Unbeknownst to the machine each one of this symbols actually represents a word. Behold: ChatGPT.

    This is basically the general idea behind generative AI as far as I’m aware. Please correct me if I’m wrong. This is obviously oversimplified.





  • So you are trying to argue that slavery is a RIGHT? This looks like and argument of guilt by association. Authoritarian is seen as bad, by giving the abolishment of slavery the label of “authoritarian” gives of the idea that you want to associate it with being bad.

    If having a law that restricts one’s ability to do something is “authoritarian” then any law is authoritarian, because laws, by definition, determine what behaviour is and isn’t allowed within a society. On that note, morality determines legality, not the other way around.

    Slavery means that, if you’re rich enough, you should be allowed to revoke the rights of others. This is refutable at so many levels. If someone were to “willingly” agree to give up their rights, then just you’re just taking advantage of someone who was born in an unfavourable position and have no other choice other than to accept (and maybe not starve) or starve.