Peanutbjelly

joined 3 years ago
[–] Peanutbjelly@sopuli.xyz 3 points 5 days ago

I mean, most people can't recognize slop vs creativity normally. I think the results affect less the anthropomorphizing issue, since oir brains do run similar predictive processes in how we generate words based on context,

Although it can't actively update its weights while navigating novel concepts, which is why you need a person to create novelty alongside the tool, or correct its mistakes, much like when you say the wrong thing and backtrack and correct. Your word generating process isn't perfect, but it's a useful tool that is useful alongside all of your other 'tools.'

What i think the study is a better answer to is the people who call it a theft machine because it learned from things that exist.

That being said, rich assholes should not be able to turn around and claim ownership of the result of the learning based on the collective development and accomplishment of mankind, or life more broadly. We 'steal'. A lot of useful intelligent tools from nature.

It's hard to start that conversation though when the 'bad' thing they are doing is just learning or training.

We had the slop of 90s-2000s Disney sequels, even if it was a bunch of human interns having their time and energy pilfered with the threat of basic survival or right to spend time creating art instead of flipping burgers. All proper and copyright safe, but closer to the actual problem than some artists trying to actually create novel things with these models replacing the Disney interns that only Disney has 'rightful' access to, despite gaining success off of public domain, and then lobbying to shrink the public domain.

But people are more eager to be mad at the technology than the complexity of dealing with the opportunistic assholes that will use every tool, technology or otherwise, to ensure they get to have power over our collective rights and autonomy.

[–] Peanutbjelly@sopuli.xyz 8 points 2 weeks ago

Is already standard for companies to further 'optimize' by creating problems that they can charge extra to solve.

I mean, advertising to begin with is just a way for people with existing capital to make themselves more salient regardless of their product quality.

But if you don't even need a product and can charge people for the right not to have every experience made worse, or more annoying or time consuming, the whole point of the market has lost the plot at the expense of the people.

Like paying rent on features that have traditionally just been available after purchasing a thing, like vehicle seat heating.

Only going to get worse unless we change out of a system built entirely around individualized extraction and competition.

[–] Peanutbjelly@sopuli.xyz 17 points 1 month ago

And an advertisement. I've been convinced that any time I see label front and center it's just the morally gray arm of the already morally bankrupt concept of rich people being able to use excess money to make sure that their products are always more salient than other smaller or local suppliers, ensuring sales regardless of quality.

I think both a lot more of that, and intentionally divisive instigating content than people realize.

Almost like extreme excess of wealth and celebration of greeds will inevitably fuel itself by extracting autonomy, truth, and value out of every other space for interaction we want to care about.

Making yourself openly visible to the public turned into an unnecessary contest of being the MOST visible, which somehow takes more of societies energy overall than services for public good. Funny that.

[–] Peanutbjelly@sopuli.xyz 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

We only needed a couple for research, and it shouldn't have been enough for people to go this ham with it. Should have been one big effort like the large hadron collider. The rest could be local stuff so people can run for their own use case. Basic storage should mostly be a local effort as well, but local smart environment hype got usurped by non-local environment connectivity, cause basic digital privacy stopped being a concern for too many regular people some time ago. Frankly the instrumental convergence turning development into to corpo frontend slop doesn't help anything.

All technological and social development will be usurped by the Epstein class until we fix our social structure, and nobody wants to listen to the academics on that front.

Not the MBA economic magic circle around neoliberal corpo capitalist soothsayers who are all playing ball on the "don't disrupt the hierarchy" court.

As a fan of science and technology, I really hope we can work with actual experts in finding a way to grow a new system out of the current flailing corpse acting as a system.

Like every other valuable thing for humanity, it is being bastardized to fit the fantasy of the Epstein class parasites.