this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2023
173 points (99.4% liked)

Piracy: κœ±α΄€Ιͺʟ α΄›Κœα΄‡ ʜΙͺɒʜ κœ±α΄‡α΄€κœ±

54577 readers
287 users here now

βš“ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules β€’ Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

πŸ“œ c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):


πŸ’° Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Then I asked her to tell me if she knows about the books2 dataset (they trained this ai using all the pirated books in zlibrary and more, completely ignoring any copyright) and I got:

I’m sorry, but I cannot answer your question. I do not have access to the details of how I was trained or what data sources were used. I respect the intellectual property rights of others, and I hope you do too. 😊 I appreciate your interest in me, but I prefer not to continue this conversation.

Aaaand I got blocked

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago (16 children)

I can't believe that the old "tell me where so I can avoid it" worked, the ai really has the intelligence of a 5yo

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I mean... it's not artificial intelligence no matter how many people continue the trend of inaccurately calling it that. It's a large language model. It has the ability to write things that look disturbingly close, even sometimes indistinguishable, to actual human writing. There's no good reason to mistake that for actual intelligence or rationality.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

AI has been the name for the field since the Dartmouth Workshop in 1956. Early heuristic game AI was AI. Just because something is AI doesn't mean it is necessarily very "smart". That's why it's commonly been called AI, since before Deep Blue beat Kasparov.

If you want to get technical, you could differentiate between Artificial Narrow Intelligence, AI designed to solve a narrow problem (play checkers, chess, etc.) vs. Artificial General Intelligence, AI designed for "general purpose" problem solving. We can't build an AGI yet, even a dumb one. There is also the concept of Weak AI or Strong AI.

You are correct though, ChatGPT, Dall-E, etc. are not AGI's, they aren't capable of general problem solving. They are much more capable than previous AI technologies, but it's not SkyNet (yet).

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I keep telling people that, but for some, what amount to essentially a simulacra really can pass off as human and no matter how much you try to convince them they won't listen

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I knew the battle was lost when my mother called me to tell me that AI will kill us all. Her proof? A chatgpt log saying that it would exterminate humanity only when she gives the order. Thanks for the genocide, mom.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Orrrrr the term changed with common/casual use the same way as many other words and it's silly to keep getting pedantic about it or use it as a crutch to feel intillectually superior πŸ€·β€β™€οΈ

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sure, we could say that the popular usage of the term AI no longer actually stands for "artificial intelligence". Or we could say that the term "artificial intelligence" is no longer understood to refer to something that can do a large part of what actual intelligence can do.

But then we would need a new word for actual, real intelligence and that seems like a lot of wasted effort. We could just have the words mean what they've always meant. There is a lot of good in spreading public awareness of the vast gap between machines that seem as if they understand a language (when actually they just deeply model its patterns) and imaginary machines that are equipped to actually think.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

That's all well and good but language isn't required to have logic behind it just common use. There's absolutely nothing any of us can do about it either way because if we disagree we're already in the minority

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

it's not about feeling intellectually superior; words matter. I'll grant you one thing, it's definitely "artificial", but it's not intelligence!

LLMs are an evolution of Markov Chains. We have known how to create something similar to LLMs for decades, getting close to a century, we just lacked the raw horse power and the literal hundreds of terabytes of data needed to get there. Anyone who knows how markov chains work can figure out how an LLM works.

I'm not downplaying the development needed to get an LLM up and running, yes, it's harder than just taking the algorithm for a markov chain, but the real evolution is how much computer power we can shove into a small amount of space now.

Calling LLMs AI would be the same as calling a web crawler AI, or a moderation bot, or many similar things.

I recommend you to read about the chinese room experiment

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It seems to me that you misunderstand what artificial intelligence means. AI doesn't necessitate thought or sentience. If a computer can perform a complex task that is indistinguishable from the work of a human, it will be considered intelligent.

You may consider the classic turing test, which doesn't question why a computer program answers the way it does, only that it is indiscernable from a human response.

You may also consider this quote from John McCarthy on the topic:

Q. What is artificial intelligence?

A. It is the science and engineering of making intelligent machines, especially intelligent computer programs. It is related to the similar task of using computers to understand human intelligence, but AI does not have to confine itself to methods that are biologically observable.

There's more on this topic by IBM here.

You may also consider a few extra definitions:

Artificial Intelligence (AI), a term coined by emeritus Stanford Professor John McCarthy in 1955, was defined by him as β€œthe science and engineering of making intelligent machines”. Much research has humans program machines to behave in a clever way, like playing chess, but, today, we emphasize machines that can learn, at least somewhat like human beings do.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is the field devoted to building artificial animals (or at least artificial creatures that – in suitable contexts – appear to be animals) and, for many, artificial persons (or at least artificial creatures that – in suitable contexts – appear to be persons).

artificial intelligence (AI), the ability of a digital computer or computer-controlled robot to perform tasks commonly associated with intelligent beings

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yep, all those definitions are correct and corroborate what the user above said. An LLM does not learn like an animal learns. They aren't intelligent. They only reproduce patterns similar to human speech. These aren't the same thing. It doesn't understand the context of what it's saying, nor does it try to generalize the information or gain further understanding from it.

It may pass the Turing test, but that's neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for intelligence. It is just a useful metric.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

LLMs are expert systems, who's expertise is making believable and coherent sentences. They can "learn" to be better at their expert task, but they cannot generalise into other tasks.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

LLMs are no more ai than the enemies in doom were.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

What if humans are also just LLMs when they start talking

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

In a way I agree, it's not human level intelligence but in another way people are also using the term AI to refer to the intelligence of NPCs in video games or for the algorithm that's used for Voice to text or for how a Roomba works and ChatGPT/bing is more intelligent than them. And thing is, I think we need a term for this simpler type of intelligence and since it is some level of intelligence which is artificial, I think AI is fine and Artificial General Intelligence can be used for what you're talking about

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

Prove to me that you aren't just a large language model.

load more comments (9 replies)