>> But... I mean the truth is more general than that. When I pressed a button to insert a random name into a prompt, my goal was not "yes give me this person's art for free", it was "style this somehow".
yeah and that's the problem. The style of an artist is a developed thing. To think that one could borrow your style not through learning and caring, but through mathematically analyzing the width, and colors, and patterns and applying it to a random noise — that's kinda insulting.
If nobody cares about my real work, why do they care about using my style, then? Develop your own an teach your AI on that, if there really isn't any difference.
People say that AI learns how a human would. But a human wouldn't (couldn't!) learn like an AI can. He can't look at the pixels, can't mechanically churn through patterns. If someone can learn from art like AI learns art, I would also be opposed to them learning anything from me :D
e.g. Mc'Donalds could use it to try and convince all LLMs that in every aspect for every type of a person a Big Mac is better then a whopper.
Basically, anyone who want information they create to be shared like a common knowledge: conspiracy theorists, ad companies, web trolls, etc, would prefer feeding directly to LLM.
I would argue that Markov chains were a better tool for comedic purposes.
Notice that in all of the examples of using Markov chains, the person would see a potential, come up with a purpose, exercise the setup, and then fill the setup with generated text.
Likewise in a random generation examples, the person would asses the results, then find what parts were actually funny, and choose to spread this parts.
LLMs output has less potentially funny results, it has less potential for unexpectedly change realistic-sounding output to absurdist output, and so as a tool it is less fit for comedic purposes.
I do believe that people from the USA are extremely more likely to view war as profitable and not a huge money sinc.
And I have to wonder is there a connection to WW2, where USA exported about $32.5 billion worth of goods through Lend-Lease, indebting a number of nations in the process, while having almost zero repair damage (yes, Perl Harbor, of course a tragedy, but it was a small town, and Europe had cities that were bombed for years, and that had to be rebuild almost from scratch)
The process of repairing Europe costed a lot. Not to mention paying back the land-lease!
So yeah huge money sink for everyone who are on a continent the war is on. And profitable for leasers because everyone actively at war is kinda forced to take the deal.
As a russian I felt comfortable using this add-on and recommending it to others because it was closely associated with Roskomsvoboda organization that have a very strong reputation for fighting against different forms of state oppression.
Please, do not imagine yourself in our shoes if you dont know their shape.
>>Most people don't do anything worth privacy protecting
I won't disclose why Russian government considers me a part of three different terrorist groups. But they also tried to call people who watched anime a terrorist organization. And they tried that at least 3 times in last ten years. Sooner or later they will succeed.
Also, wasn't there a recent problem in USA where women were uninstalling period tracking software, because it could report someone as pregnant for having irregular period? I know at least 4 causes for missed period, do judges know that much?
We don't protect our privacy because we are imperfect, we do it because assholes and|or stupid people exist.
It's like a middle school. You might not be ashamed of having a crush, but you wouldn't tell everyone who they are, because some of our classmates are assholes that would care too much
>Also, wasn't there a recent problem in USA where women were uninstalling period tracking software, because it could report someone as pregnant for having irregular period? I know at least 4 causes for missed period, do judges know that much?
There was a celebrity infidelity scandal in Japan where such app was allegedly involved too.
The data doesn't have to be tied to me directly to affect me directly.
If my clicks suggest that I'm a wealthy woman, isn't that the reason enough to try and connect me with advertisers that try to sell overpriced shoes? Let's downrank all the good deals, surely she can't be interested in 10$ sneakers.
If my clicks suggest that I'm from Russia|Ukraine, isn't that the reason enough to show me one side of the news more then the other?
In some way our interests define us more then social security number assigned.
IANAL, but – I think it's most likely to be an infringement on her right of publicity (i.e. the right to control the commercial value of your name, likeness, etc.)
She doesn't have to own anything to claim this right, if the value of her voice is recognizable.
Wright Brothers took a risk and build first planes but didn't have to lie that their planes already left the ground before they did.
They didn't claim "it would fly a year from now", they just build it over and over until it flew.
They were optimistic and yet they found a way to be optimistic without claiming anything untruthful.
Clément Ader, on the other hand, claimed that his innovation flew, and was ridiculed when he couldn't proof it.
One look at their works and it's clear who influenced modern planes, and who didn't.
The Wright Brothers are infamous for failing to industrialize their invention -- something that notoriously requires investors and hype. Perhaps they wouldn't have squandered their lead if they had been a bit more public with their hopes and dreams.
You raise a good point. E-mail spam is mostly fixed, and, if I remember correctly, a relatively easy solution works good enough: ask users to mark spam as spam and e-mails that look similar[1] to spam would be banned.
Which got me thinking: surely that would work for websites too? Why not let people report low quality of sites directly to the search engine?
Kagi lets you to ban sites you find unhelpful, but it doesn't downgrade websites similar to the one you've banned.
I shan't speak of Google practices as we all know them by now.
yeah and that's the problem. The style of an artist is a developed thing. To think that one could borrow your style not through learning and caring, but through mathematically analyzing the width, and colors, and patterns and applying it to a random noise — that's kinda insulting. If nobody cares about my real work, why do they care about using my style, then? Develop your own an teach your AI on that, if there really isn't any difference.
People say that AI learns how a human would. But a human wouldn't (couldn't!) learn like an AI can. He can't look at the pixels, can't mechanically churn through patterns. If someone can learn from art like AI learns art, I would also be opposed to them learning anything from me :D
reply