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

Piracy: źœ±į“€ÉŖŹŸ į“›Źœį“‡ ŹœÉŖÉ¢Źœ źœ±į“‡į“€źœ±

54577 readers
259 users here now

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

Rules ā€¢ 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

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


šŸ’° 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:

Iā€™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. šŸ˜Š 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
[ā€“] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago (14 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.

[ā€“] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 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

[ā€“] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (3 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 šŸ¤·ā€ā™€ļø

[ā€“] [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.

[ā€“] [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

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)