everyone replying to this post needs to log the fuck off and touch grass. Machine learning was a part of T&S for decades before you ever heard the term "generative AI". If you've ever complained about "all the bots on Bluesky, they should do something", the "something" you're asking for is ML.
Reposted from
ROOST
AND WE'RE HATCHED!
ROOST launches at the #ParisAIActionSummit, bringing together tech companies and philanthropies to deliver free, open-source safety tools. Join us 👉 roost.tools
ROOST launches at the #ParisAIActionSummit, bringing together tech companies and philanthropies to deliver free, open-source safety tools. Join us 👉 roost.tools
Comments
thanks for explaining it (yet again)
I still am seeking ANY use for generative LLMs, mind you!
Yes! But not on stolen data & huge power/water consumption.
An ethical one would license training material, to start, which means Paying The Authors. Since one like that doesn't exist… oh well. I skim a lot of free adventures for adapting.
https://www.techpolicy.press/using-llms-for-policy-driven-content-classification/
(no one wants me to fumble through explainers for anything, lol)
Touch grass, lie under the grass, feed the grass, whatever, the repliers need to do something like that
It’s a game where humans identify sea creatures to help train an algorithm that will help surveys of sea life. It would allow more data processing and faster.
Jeebus. So little brain, such loud mouths.
it’s similar to a local politician working to improve a life for their constituents, even though the word “politics” itself is so toxic
Between Adobe Illustrator and everything else I never trust anything that uses those two letters by default now, but that's where like 99% of funding is ATM so... 🤷
A big part of the problem is all the people conflating Machine Learning with "generative LLMs".
If the differences aren't differentiated, and the good praised; as the bad are condemned, the public will (reasonably) come to believe they ARE all the same.
That’s “normal” human behavior, but it’s a major problem. We *should* be expected to understand life is not a set of simple dichotomies
1/2
2/2
…I’m off to teach my History of Psych seminar (subtitle: it’s never that simple, dammit) at 9am
I have admined (small forum) in heyday of internet - and though I could handle it mostly by just blanking it out.
There were days I couldn't.
Hell, there are days now I can't look at the front page of some art galleries because things exist.
https://bsky.app/profile/randileeharper.bsky.social/post/3lismd3dnvc2o
AI is the big umbrella. Inside it, ML is a subset that helps computers learn from data. A subset of ML is Deep Learning, which uses layered neural networks to recognize patterns.
Generative AI is a part of DL that creates text, images, and music.
“Pattern recognition” is telling it like it is.
For generative software, add “and response”.
My ¥2.
* emergent associations
** literally, a matrix, like a giant one
The retail market: I won't buy anything if you call it AI. AI is evil, dangerous, and steals art.
A few folks who get thrown out the window: Maybe what it does matters as much as what it's called?
I said that's great, but perhaps we should figure out linear regression and 200s first?
Came back later to see that you'd done excellent work (far beyond anything I could have pushed back with).
Is there something I can do for you to say thanks for taking the hit?
(lol my literal first thought on all this was, wow - people seem upset. I'll wait 'til Rah weighs in to make a decision since I know nothing about any of this!)
Thank you!
The calico: They're a LIAR
I think a lot of that has to do with the unsustainability of GenAI and that the terms are used by gen AI companies to appear more serious/trustworthy.
Just a theory though since it came after ML as you said.
I'm attributing intent behind their wording. The idea is that calling it an image generator (or something similar) is not interesting enough to sell the product.
It's a marketing strategy like any other and wouldn't the big companies that utilize gen AI not be soul sucking manmade horrors it would be fine.
Seriously though, doing something that destroys normal humans is one of the best use cases for AI.
ML is just math. Be mad at use cases, data practices, and marketing, not tools.
https://glaze.cs.uchicago.edu/
this topic has been so thoroughly and overwhelmingly poisoned by genAI grifting, and moderation by its nature is very behind the scenes, how's anyone supposed to know the difference?
Seriously, that’s essentially how I know all this!
(Bookmarking this in case I need to share it with other people freaking out over the situation 📌)
I’m only semi-joking when I say I’m a bit worried that the logical conclusion of a lot of discourse is basically indistinguishable from being an anprim.
(Yeah, I know, this thread is about something slightly different, but I like #MurderBotBot and wanted to advertise its service...)
I've never seen so many replies of "fuck off" to a post. I feel like people are vastly misunderstanding what this is just based on negative perceptions of the generative shit.
If I had made a revolutionary process for turning seawater into drinking water that used a fraction of the energy involved in existing desalination technology, I wouldn't call it "the ponzi scheme"