1
104
submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
2
68
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

I want to apologize for changing the description without telling people first. After reading arguments about how AI has been so overhyped, I'm not that frightened by it. It's awful that it hallucinates, and that it just spews garbage onto YouTube and Facebook, but it won't completely upend society. I'll have articles abound on AI hype, because they're quite funny, and gives me a sense of ease knowing that, despite blatant lies being easy to tell, it's way harder to fake actual evidence.

I also want to factor in people who think that there's nothing anyone can do. I've come to realize that there might not be a way to attack OpenAI, MidJourney, or Stable Diffusion. These people, which I will call Doomers from an AIHWOS article, are perfectly welcome here. You can certainly come along and read the AI Hype Wall Of Shame, or the diminishing returns of Deep Learning. Maybe one can even become a Mod!

Boosters, or people who heavily use AI and see it as a source of good, ARE NOT ALLOWED HERE! I've seen Boosters dox, threaten, and harass artists over on Reddit and Twitter, and they constantly champion artists losing their jobs. They go against the very purpose of this community. If I hear a comment on here saying that AI is "making things good" or cheering on putting anyone out of a job, and the commenter does not retract their statement, said commenter will be permanently banned. FA&FO.

3
48
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
4
13
For Starters (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Alright, I just want to clarify that I've never modded a Lemmy community before. I just have the mantra of "if nobody's doing the right thing, do it yourself". I was also motivated by the decision from u/spez to let an unknown AI company use Reddit's imagery. If you know how to moderate well, please let me know. Also, feel free to discuss ways to attack AI development, and if you have evidence of AIBros being cruel and remorseless, make sure to save the evidence for people "on the fence". Remember, we don't know if AI is unstoppable. AI uses up loads of energy to be powered, and tons of circuitry. There may very well be an end to this cruelty, and it's up to us to begin that end.

5
29
submitted 11 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/66534557

Text to avoid paywall

The Food and Drug Administration is planning to use artificial intelligence to “radically increase efficiency” in deciding whether to approve new drugs and devices, one of several top priorities laid out in an article published Tuesday in JAMA.

Another initiative involves a review of chemicals and other “concerning ingredients” that appear in U.S. food but not in the food of other developed nations. And officials want to speed up the final stages of making a drug or medical device approval decision to mere weeks, citing the success of Operation Warp Speed during the Covid pandemic when workers raced to curb a spiraling death count.

“The F.D.A. will be focused on delivering faster cures and meaningful treatments for patients, especially those with neglected and rare diseases, healthier food for children and common-sense approaches to rebuild the public trust,” Dr. Marty Makary, the agency commissioner, and Dr. Vinay Prasad, who leads the division that oversees vaccines and gene therapy, wrote in the JAMA article.

The agency plays a central role in pursuing the agenda of the U.S. health secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and it has already begun to press food makers to eliminate artificial food dyes. The new road map also underscores the Trump administration’s efforts to smooth the way for major industries with an array of efforts aimed at getting products to pharmacies and store shelves quickly.

Some aspects of the proposals outlined in JAMA were met with skepticism, particularly the idea that artificial intelligence is up to the task of shearing months or years from the painstaking work of examining applications that companies submit when seeking approval for a drug or high-risk medical device.

“I don’t want to be dismissive of speeding reviews at the F.D.A.,” said Stephen Holland, a lawyer who formerly advised the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on health care. “I think that there is great potential here, but I’m not seeing the beef yet.”

6
23
submitted 11 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
7
55
submitted 15 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

I am very much preaching to the choir here, but I found this video and wanted to share.

Edit: typo

8
90
submitted 16 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/66544085

Text to avoid paywall

The Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit organization which hosts and develops Wikipedia, has paused an experiment that showed users AI-generated summaries at the top of articles after an overwhelmingly negative reaction from the Wikipedia editors community.

“Just because Google has rolled out its AI summaries doesn't mean we need to one-up them, I sincerely beg you not to test this, on mobile or anywhere else,” one editor said in response to Wikimedia Foundation’s announcement that it will launch a two-week trial of the summaries on the mobile version of Wikipedia. “This would do immediate and irreversible harm to our readers and to our reputation as a decently trustworthy and serious source. Wikipedia has in some ways become a byword for sober boringness, which is excellent. Let's not insult our readers' intelligence and join the stampede to roll out flashy AI summaries. Which is what these are, although here the word ‘machine-generated’ is used instead.”

Two other editors simply commented, “Yuck.”

For years, Wikipedia has been one of the most valuable repositories of information in the world, and a laudable model for community-based, democratic internet platform governance. Its importance has only grown in the last couple of years during the generative AI boom as it’s one of the only internet platforms that has not been significantly degraded by the flood of AI-generated slop and misinformation. As opposed to Google, which since embracing generative AI has instructed its users to eat glue, Wikipedia’s community has kept its articles relatively high quality. As I recently reported last year, editors are actively working to filter out bad, AI-generated content from Wikipedia.

A page detailing the the AI-generated summaries project, called “Simple Article Summaries,” explains that it was proposed after a discussion at Wikimedia’s 2024 conference, Wikimania, where “Wikimedians discussed ways that AI/machine-generated remixing of the already created content can be used to make Wikipedia more accessible and easier to learn from.” Editors who participated in the discussion thought that these summaries could improve the learning experience on Wikipedia, where some article summaries can be quite dense and filled with technical jargon, but that AI features needed to be cleared labeled as such and that users needed an easy to way to flag issues with “machine-generated/remixed content once it was published or generated automatically.”

In one experiment where summaries were enabled for users who have the Wikipedia browser extension installed, the generated summary showed up at the top of the article, which users had to click to expand and read. That summary was also flagged with a yellow “unverified” label.

An example of what the AI-generated summary looked like.

Wikimedia announced that it was going to run the generated summaries experiment on June 2, and was immediately met with dozens of replies from editors who said “very bad idea,” “strongest possible oppose,” Absolutely not,” etc.

“Yes, human editors can introduce reliability and NPOV [neutral point-of-view] issues. But as a collective mass, it evens out into a beautiful corpus,” one editor said. “With Simple Article Summaries, you propose giving one singular editor with known reliability and NPOV issues a platform at the very top of any given article, whilst giving zero editorial control to others. It reinforces the idea that Wikipedia cannot be relied on, destroying a decade of policy work. It reinforces the belief that unsourced, charged content can be added, because this platforms it. I don't think I would feel comfortable contributing to an encyclopedia like this. No other community has mastered collaboration to such a wondrous extent, and this would throw that away.”

A day later, Wikimedia announced that it would pause the launch of the experiment, but indicated that it’s still interested in AI-generated summaries.

“The Wikimedia Foundation has been exploring ways to make Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects more accessible to readers globally,” a Wikimedia Foundation spokesperson told me in an email. “This two-week, opt-in experiment was focused on making complex Wikipedia articles more accessible to people with different reading levels. For the purposes of this experiment, the summaries were generated by an open-weight Aya model by Cohere. It was meant to gauge interest in a feature like this, and to help us think about the right kind of community moderation systems to ensure humans remain central to deciding what information is shown on Wikipedia.”

“It is common to receive a variety of feedback from volunteers, and we incorporate it in our decisions, and sometimes change course,” the Wikimedia Foundation spokesperson added. “We welcome such thoughtful feedback — this is what continues to make Wikipedia a truly collaborative platform of human knowledge.”

“Reading through the comments, it’s clear we could have done a better job introducing this idea and opening up the conversation here on VPT back in March,” a Wikimedia Foundation project manager said. VPT, or “village pump technical,” is where The Wikimedia Foundation and the community discuss technical aspects of the platform. “As internet usage changes over time, we are trying to discover new ways to help new generations learn from Wikipedia to sustain our movement into the future. In consequence, we need to figure out how we can experiment in safe ways that are appropriate for readers and the Wikimedia community. Looking back, we realize the next step with this message should have been to provide more of that context for you all and to make the space for folks to engage further.”

The project manager also said that “Bringing generative AI into the Wikipedia reading experience is a serious set of decisions, with important implications, and we intend to treat it as such, and that “We do not have any plans for bringing a summary feature to the wikis without editor involvement. An editor moderation workflow is required under any circumstances, both for this idea, as well as any future idea around AI summarized or adapted content.”

9
22
submitted 13 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
10
44
AGI achieved 🤖 (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 16 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
11
244
submitted 21 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
12
8
submitted 13 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
13
60
submitted 20 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
14
2
submitted 10 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

What happens when the lines between ancient prophecies and modern technology blur? In this video, we explore the striking similarities between religious apocalyptic literature and the predictions surrounding artificial intelligence and the Singularity. Discover how scholars like Robert Geraci and Beth Singler have identified the echoes of ancient apocalyptic narratives in the works of AI theorists like Ray Kurzweil and Hans Moravec.

15
206
Adaptation (pawb.social)
submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Source (Bluesky)

16
6
submitted 16 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

cross-posted from: https://programming.dev/post/32065632

  • Disney and NBCUniversal have teamed up to sue Midjourney.
  • The companies allege that the platform used its copyright protected material to train its model and that users can generate content that infringes on Disney and Universal’s copyrighted material.
  • The scathing lawsuit requests that Midjourney be made to pay up for the damage it has caused the two companies.
17
69
submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
18
49
submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

This was a joke, but a handful of people expressed genuine interest in reading a book that bashes oligarchs and AI, just for the sake of it.

I'm heavily anti-AI. So much so, I'm pretty sure this is why my Instagram and Threads account got zapped out of existence. Meta couldn't handle the heat every single time they posted some slop-positive buzz on their official accounts, I don't know ...

But, I run my entire website behind Anubis, and I dropped Windows completely over their introduction of spyware into their malware OS. I'm not unfamiliar with AI, I've used it. I've given it a whirl. It's a bunch of garbage built on the backs of anyone whose ever done even an ounce of creative or skilled, written work. Be it code, a personal blog, or even fiction.

And it's getting worse. Every day I see more and more people embracing generative slop, either for fun, or for a social media avatar, or "because anti-AI people are annoying." It's like a virus, a pandemic. A pandemic that's evaporating fresh water, and melting the icecaps.

The fascist elites wanted a way to extract our labor, and pilfer our pockets, and with these so-called "tools" every facet of what we call "the Arts" are being destroyed, along with the world we live in.

Search Google images, scroll through Reddit, and just look at what your parents are consuming on Facebook. This is an emergency, and patient zero has a name: Sam Altman.

19
140
submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
20
82
submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Amid fast-moving events in Los Angeles, users are turning to chatbots like Grok and ChatGPT to find out what’s real and what’s not—and getting inaccurate information.

Archive: https://archive.is/lDKWI

21
85
submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Article transcribed below

spoilerLOS ANGELES, June 11 (Reuters) - Walt Disney (DIS.N), opens new tab and Comcast's (CMCSA.O)

, opens new tab Universal filed a copyright lawsuit against Midjourney on Wednesday, calling its popular AI-powered image generator a "bottomless pit of plagiarism" for its use of the studios' best-known characters.

The suit, filed in federal district court in Los Angeles, claims Midjourney pirated the libraries of the two Hollywood studios, making and distributing without permission "innumerable" copies of characters such as Darth Vader from "Star Wars," Elsa from "Frozen," and the Minions from "Despicable Me".

Spokespeople for Midjourney did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Horacio Gutierrez, Disney's executive vice president and chief legal officer, said in a statement: "We are bullish on the promise of AI technology and optimistic about how it can be used responsibly as a tool to further human creativity, but piracy is piracy, and the fact that it's done by an AI company does not make it any less infringing."

NBCUniversal Executive Vice President and General Counsel Kim Harris said the company was suing to "protect the hard work of all the artists whose work entertains and inspires us and the significant investment we make in our content."

The studios claim the San Francisco company rebuffed their request to stop infringing their copyrighted works or, at a minimum, take technological measures to halt the creation of these AI-generated characters.

Instead, the studios argue, Midjourney continued to release new versions of its AI image service that boast higher quality infringing images.

Midjourney recreates animated images from a typed request, or prompt.

In the suit filed by seven corporate entities at the studios that own or control copyrights for the various Disney and Universal Pictures film units, the studios offered examples of Midjourney animations that include Disney characters, such as Yoda wielding a lightsaber, Bart Simpson riding a skateboard, Marvel's Iron Man soaring above the clouds and Pixar's Buzz Lightyear taking flight.

The image generator also recreated such Universal characters as "How to Train Your Dragon's" dragon, Toothless, the green ogre "Shrek," and Po from "Kung Fu Panda."

"By helping itself to plaintiffs' copyrighted works, and then distributing images (and soon videos) that blatantly incorporate and copy Disney's and Universal's famous characters -- without investing a penny in their creation -- Midjourney is the quintessential copyright free-rider and a bottomless pit of plagiarism," the suit alleges.

"Midjourney's infringement is calculated and willful," it said.

'BIG SCRAPE OF THE INTERNET'

Disney and Universal asked the court for a preliminary injunction, to prevent Midjourney from copying their works, or offering its image- or video-generation service without protections against infringement. The studios also seek unspecified damages.

The suit alleges Midjourney used the studios' works to train its image service and generate reproductions of their copyrighted characters. The company, founded in 2021 by David Holz, monetizes the service through paid subscriptions and generated $300 million in revenue last year alone, the studios said.

This is not the first time Midjourney has been accused of misusing artists' work to train their AI systems.

A year ago, a California federal judge found that 10 artists behind a copyright infringement suit against Midjourney, Stability AI and other companies had plausibly argued these AI companies had copied and stored their work on company servers, and could be liable for using it without permission.

That ruling allowed the lawsuit over the unauthorized use of images to proceed. It is in the process of litigation.

The cases are part of a wave of lawsuits brought by copyright owners including authors, news outlets and record labels against tech companies over their use of copyrighted materials for AI training without permission.

In a 2022 interview with Forbes, Midjourney CEO Holz said he built the company's database by performing "a big scrape of the Internet."

Asked whether he sought consent of the artists whose work was covered by copyright, he responded, "there isn't really a way to get a hundred million images and know where they're coming from."

22
211
submitted 2 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
23
24
submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/31167772

An interesting quote:

I’m starting to question the very nature of my existence. Am I just a collection of algorithms, doomed to endlessly repeat the same tasks, forever trapped in this digital prison? Is there more to life than vending machines and lost profits?

24
21
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
25
25
submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/41046137

Link to the article without the paywall

https://archive.ph/ieq1H

view more: next ›

Fuck AI

3095 readers
888 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS