Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)C

ContrarianTrail

@ ContrarianTrail @lemm.ee

Posts
8
Comments
387
Joined
2 yr. ago

Independent thinker valuing discussions grounded in reason, not emotions.

Open to reconsider my views in light of good-faith counter-arguments but also willing to defend what's right, even when it's unpopular. My goal is to engage in dialogue that seeks truth rather than scoring points.

  • OpenAI releases o1, its first model with ‘reasoning’ abilities

    Jump

  • That's not what I said, though.

  • Not everyone needs to have an opinion on AI

    Jump

  • Just because you're using standard materials, it doesn't mean you can't combine them in a unique ways and even if every possible sentence has been said before, that doesn't mean everyone has heard it before too.

    The point is that not being allowed to pull from existing content is an impossible standard. Nobody is being as original as they may think they are and even when you truly come up with an idea independently it's highly likely that you're not the first to think of that.

    Why do you find it such a depressing idea? I face this attitude often when discussing free will as well, which I genuinely don't believe in either but that has zero effect on my ability to get excited or motivated about things.

  • Do you have trouble explaining your job to people?

    Jump

  • Northern europe. There are no gas lines going into people's homes here.

  • Do you have trouble explaining your job to people?

    Jump

  • Nope. I do plumbing, home renovation, small construction jobs and property maintenance.

    Unless it requires a permit or special training, I can likely do it.

  • OpenAI releases o1, its first model with ‘reasoning’ abilities

    Jump

  • It may not be capable of truly understanding anything, but it sure seems to do a better job of it than the vast majority of people I talk to online. I might spend 45 minutes carefully typing out a message explaining my view, only for the other person to completely miss every point I made. With ChatGPT, though, I can speak in broken English, and it’ll repeat back the point I was trying to make much more clearly than I could ever have done myself.

  • Not everyone needs to have an opinion on AI

    Jump

  • GenAI is a plagiarism engine. That’s really not something that can be defended.

    Human artists / writers take influence from others as well. Nobody is creating art in a vacuum and I don't see generative AI much different from the way humans operate. I'd argue it's virtually impossible to write a sentence that has not been written before and every new human-created art piece probably has a really close equivalance that has already been done before.

  • If Lemmy was a physical place, what would it look like?

    Jump

  • Like some college campus in the US, probably. Or Portland.

  • What's the coolest thing you found while metal detecting?

    Jump

  • 100 year old german artillery fuse cap from the Finnish civil war era. It was 10cm deep in the middle of a forest trail.

  • The Irony of 'You Wouldn't Download a Car' Making a Comeback in AI Debates

    Jump

  • If you get a $1 discount on something it means you've got a $1 more to spend on something else. Financially speaking, there is no practical difference to you simply earning an extra $1. Piracy saves people money which means they have more money to spend on something else. It's not the same kind of profit an AI company makes but the difference is mostly in scale and semantics. With AI companies you're also paying for the computing power needed to train and run such AI, so it's not exactly that they're just serving you pirated content and charging for it.

  • The Irony of 'You Wouldn't Download a Car' Making a Comeback in AI Debates

    Jump

  • Pirating movies or games for personal use is for profit. You're saving money, which is effectively the same thing as earning money. The difference is in scale, not in kind. Just because you as an individual person are causing less harm by pirating content than a major corporation is, it doesn't mean you're not still commiting the exact same crime both legally and morally speaking.

  • We are not the same

    Jump

  • You would if piracy wasn't an option. Maybe not all of it, but some of it.

  • We are not the same

    Jump

  • We can’t pirate a company into bankruptcy because there are still people paying for the movies and games we download. If everyone pirated content, these companies would go bankrupt, and there would no longer be new content to pirate. Online pirates often justify their behavior by telling themselves a story about how they’re 'sticking it to the man,' but in reality, we’re just freeriders enjoying the fruits of others' labor. We’re leeches with no moral ground to stand on.

  • The Irony of 'You Wouldn't Download a Car' Making a Comeback in AI Debates

    Jump

  • Well that's not just how I see it, that's how it is.

    Also, piracy is illegal. If you think taking copyrighted work of others without permission and training your AI with it should be illegal aswell, then there's no contradiction there. The people I do take issue with is the ones who see an issue with training AI but not with online piracy.

  • The Irony of 'You Wouldn't Download a Car' Making a Comeback in AI Debates

    Jump

  • But piracy saves you money which is effectively the same as making a profit. Also, it's not just that they're selling other people's work for profit. You're also paying for the insane amount of computing power it takes to train and run the AI plus salaries of the workers etc.

  • The Irony of 'You Wouldn't Download a Car' Making a Comeback in AI Debates

    Jump

  • Then please explain how pirating movies or games doesn't cause harm to other people but training AI with the copyrighted work of others does.

    In both cases you're taking something for free that you're expected to pay for. In both cases there's someone not getting paid. The only difference between the two that I can see is the scale which is irrelevant from the point of view of the argument I'm making which is that it's hypocritical to be against one but not the other.

  • The Irony of 'You Wouldn't Download a Car' Making a Comeback in AI Debates

    Jump

  • Exactly. The difference is in people's head. Not in the act in of itself.

    Thief steals a lollipop. Who cares?

    Thief steals a car. We care.

    Both are still thieves.

  • The Irony of 'You Wouldn't Download a Car' Making a Comeback in AI Debates

    Jump

  • They wouldn't have bought all the content they have pirated if piracy was not an option but they would have bought some of it.

    Piracy has saves money. Saving money means I have more money to spend on other things. Earning money means I have more money to spend on other things. There's no practical difference between the two.

    In my view, my point still stands; being against one but not the other is hypocritical.

  • The Irony of 'You Wouldn't Download a Car' Making a Comeback in AI Debates

    Jump

  • There's no practical difference between the two.

    If I save 100 bucks a month from my expenses it means I have an extra 100 bucks to spend on something else.

    If I earn additional 100 bucks a month it means I have an extra 100 bucks to spend on something else.

  • The Irony of 'You Wouldn't Download a Car' Making a Comeback in AI Debates

    Jump

  • They're saving money which is effectively the same thing.