HopeOfTheGunblade

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago

I would love to see research data pointing either way re #1, although it would be incredibly difficult to do so ethically, verging on impossible. For #2, people have extracted originals or near-originals of inputs to the algorithms. AI generated stuff - plagiarism machine generated stuff, runs the risk of effectively revictimizing people who were already abused to get said inputs.

It's an ugly situation all around, and unfortunately I don't know that much can be done about it beyond not demonizing people who have such drives, who have not offended, so that seeking therapy for the condition doesn't screw them over. Ensuring that people are damned if they do and damned if they don't seems to pretty reliably produce worse outcomes.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 5 months ago (5 children)

You're missing 1.5: Make it impossible for people who every professional medical association of good repute says said medication help, get the medication by prescription.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

A name for this?

Isn't it ironic, dontcha think?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

But not a Venus flytrap. Or a pitcher plant. Or rafflesia. Or...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (7 children)

You don't think nearly 1/6th is statistically significant? What's the lower bound on significance as you see things?

To be clear, it's obviously dumb for their generative system to be overrepresenting turbans like this, although it's likely to be a bias in the inputs rather than something the system came up with itself, I just think that 5% is generally enough to be considered significant and calling three times that not significant confuses me.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

That's my prediction as well, but if the experiment is cheap to run, why not do so, and see of you learn something?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

So for the 99% there is an abolishment of private property, leaving only personal property and public property, everyone has an equal share, and the state has been dissolved?

Because if not, at least one of us doesn't understand communism. It's entirely possible we both don't. Would you be willing to clarify the term as you understand it?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

claymores

  1. Anything labeled "This end toward enemy" is dangerous at both ends.
[–] [email protected] 22 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Any sufficiently identical copy of me is me. A copy just means there are more me in the universe.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

Build aligned seed AI.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 months ago

My mom introduced me to Napster. So at this point, it would be a family tradition.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, unfortunately I couldn't find revenue numbers. It seems unlikely to be costing that much to host. I'd be really surprised to learn it isn't cash positive at this point.

view more: next ›