Reminds me of freshman year in college… people would sneak into each others rooms and put it up on each other’s computers, trying to see if they could set a record for most spins.
It’s because the “algorithm” looks at the average watch time and promotes content that people tend to watch to the end, so they incentivize creating content that has some punchline at the end, or that is just so confusing that you spend the whole time trying to figure out what is going on so you’re less likely to swipe away. If your mind can easily make a judgement about what you’re watching, you’re more likely to decide it’s something you don’t want to watch, and then swipe before the end. This counts against content in the algorithm.
I have my issues with Wikipedia, and he’s not wrong about the concentration of power amongst editors. However, fuck Elon Musk. He’s just mad that he can’t control Wikipedia himself.
I’ll worry about Patagonia’s “dark money” operation after I worry about Elon Musk’s $250 million purchase of the presidency, including his scheme to buy votes. If shopping at Patagonia means I’m bankrolling democrats, I’d say it’s more incentive to shop at Patagonia. I’ll take the moral high ground after we’ve eliminated the worst offenders, first.
The problem with ads is advertisers want to be able to target specific groups of people, which means the platform needs to violate your privacy to get that information.
Yeah, I’ve done similar. Bought a “all-in-one” tool kit that includes almost every basic tool. While it is nice to have one of everything, you quickly realize that the metal is so soft that some of them only last two or three uses. So, then you replace it with a better one.
I didn’t understand the importance of quality and the true premium you pay for certain things. I often would buy the cheapest thing I could find to serve a certain function. After awhile, you find yourself replacing cheap things because they wear out quickly. Buying quality can mean paying a lot more, but it also usually means you don’t have to replace it much, if at all.
I read some article about how subway franchise owners HATED $5 footlong because it was making them go broke. You could tell if you went in there by how aggressively they pushed the cookie on you.
Just the sandwich? You don’t want a cookie? Come on buy a cookie! How about a soda?
I think you’re using the word fact in two senses here.
I am making an argument that ChatGPT and other AI models were created by copyrighted works and my “proof” is the “fact” that it can reproduce those works verbatim or state facts about them that can be derived from nowhere else but in the original copyrighted work or a derivative copyrighted work that used the original under fair use.
Now, the question is — is it fair use under copyright law, for AI models to be built with copyrighted materials?
If it is considered fair use, I’m guessing it would have a chilling effect on human creativity given that no creator can guarantee themselves a living if their style of works can be reproduced so cheaply without them once AI has been trained using their works as inputs. So, it would then become necessary to revisit copyright law to redefine fair use such that we don’t discourage creators. AI can only really “remix” what it has seen before. If nothing new is being created because AI has killed all incentive to make new things, it will stagnate and degrade.
I think you’re missing the point. We are talking about whether it is fair use under the law for an AI model to even ingest copyrighted works and for those works to be used as a basis to generate the model’s output without the permission of the copyright holder of those works. This is an unsettled legal question that is being litigated right now.
Also, in some cases, the models do produce verbatim quotes of original works. So, it’s not even like we’re just arguing about whether the AI model stated some “facts.” We are also saying, hey can an AI model verbatim reproduce an actual copyrighted work? It’s settled law that humans cannot do that except in limited circumstances.
Reminds me of freshman year in college… people would sneak into each others rooms and put it up on each other’s computers, trying to see if they could set a record for most spins.