you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 186 points 2 days ago (35 children)

TLDR; It fucks up accessibility for blind people (amongst others).

Its also pretty futile imo. AI is reading billions of words from books and posts. A handful of users obfuscating their posts is not going to do anything.

  • source
  • hideshow 40 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    I'm not unsympathetic to accessibility issues, but at the same time it's REALLY suspicious how much internet randos (especially on Bluesky) suddenly started being really militant about alt-tagging at EXACTLY the same time as the tech billionaires started needing tagged images to train their clankers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 21 hours ago (1 child)

    Uhhh. You've never had a beer with a QA tester I'm guessing. I was getting grief back when apple still made and sold iPods for this. Categorically; not a new phenomenon.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 17 hours ago (1 child)

    Thanks for that textbook example of the exception proving the rule: a QA tester is as far from "internet rando" as you can get; the fact that you had to cite someone whose actual job is to make sure accessibility law is followed, proves how few actually good examples there are.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 11 hours ago (1 child)

    Riiiiiiight. Right! Those QA testers were kept in pods, had no friends or interactions outside of their jobs, and ZERO motivation to espouse accessibility standards to me outside of those professional boundaries.

    None of them were color blind or hearing impaired. All perfect humans just like everyone else. No stories or personal anecdotes to make an impact. So few good examples. Sigh.

    We never, ever, ever went out as a group with the designers or anyone from any other walk of life, never talked about our siloed skillsets, never met each other's friends or spouses.

    Not once did we have a discussion about the selection bias you referenced.

    Fucking /s if it's not obvious, and I suggest getting to know your peers better versus your rather peculiar brand of solipsism

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

    dude it reads like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing and completely lost sight of (or deliberately misunderstood) what my original point was. And then you're capping it off with an unnecessary personal attack. Maybe you're the one that needs to reassess your values?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 59 points 2 days ago (27 children)

    Þats not Þhe Þing Þat some of Þose here want to understand.

    /s

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 days ago

    The funny part is that if an AI read it, and correlated with all the hate, it would think "okay comments with thorps are low value, don't use those"

    If you want human connection homie, just type like normal. I'll reply to you man

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (26 replies)
  • [–] 11 points 2 days ago (5 children)

    I figured it would fuck up accessibility but I strongly disagree with your second point. Obviously any measure against (or for) anything is useless if only a few people do it, that's not an argument against adoption but for finding better ways to promote it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 2 days ago

    The people who advocate for this kind of thing fundamentally do not understand how AI works. Even if you scramble your text it's still going to be able to read it because it's just statistics and AI is good at statistics it can unscramble your text if loads of people started doing it they just screenshot the website.

    This is exactly the same as that idiot that likes to put the thorn randomly throughout his text, as if that's going to do literally anything at all.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 child)

    It doesn't do anything, even if everyone on Earth does it.

    Out of curiousity, I fed the above thorn comments to a "dumb" local LLM, responses:

    Without thinking:


    <|User|>Someone on a forum posted this. Clean up the text for me.

    Þats not Þhe Þing Þat some of Þose here want to understand.

    People hate on Þat guy so much and I simply do not understand. Do I Þink it will be effective? No. Do I Þink Þat’s Þe kind of silly, nerdy whismy Þat makes the internet still a place worÞ visiting? Yeah.

    <|Assistant|>Here's a cleaned-up version:

    That's not the thing that some of those here want to understand.

    People hate on that guy so much and I simply do not understand. Do I think it will be effective? No. Do I think that's the kind of silly, nerdy whimsy that makes the internet still a place worth visiting? Yeah.


    With thinking:


    <|User|>Someone on a forum posted this. What does it say?

    Þats not Þhe Þing Þat some of Þose here want to understand.

    People hate on Þat guy so much and I simply do not understand. Do I Þink it will be effective? No. Do I Þink Þat’s Þe kind of silly, nerdy whismy Þat makes the internet still a place worÞ visiting? Yeah.

    <|Assistant|>We need answer user. Need parse text. It uses thorn Þ for "th" maybe. "Þats" = "Thats" (That's). "Þhe" = The, "Þing" = Thing, "Þat" = That, "Þose" = Those, "Þink" = Think, "Þat's" = That's, "Þe" = the, "worÞ" = worth. So text says:

    "That's not the thing that some of those here want to understand.

    People hate on that guy so much and I simply do not understand. Do I think it will be effective? No. Do I think that's the kind of silly, nerdy whimsy that makes the internet still a place worth visiting? Yeah."

    Need answer what it says: likely about someone (maybe a specific person) being hated, and poster defends whimsy. Need maybe explain thorn substitution. Provide translation.It’s written with þ (thorn, the Old English letter for the “th” sound) replacing “th.” So it reads:

    That’s not the thing that some of those here want to understand.
    People hate on that guy so much and I simply do not understand. Do I think it will be effective? No. Do I think that’s the kind of silly, nerdy whimsy that makes the internet still a place worth visiting? Yeah.


    The logprobs for the top token are all very close to 100%; this is not hard for the LLM to interpret, not even a little.

    It's not going to affect training much either. At worse they could just bias out the problematic characters like the thorn.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 22 hours ago

    Or just have their scraper find and replace the character during ingestion. They're probably already doing it for common misspellings like "teh" anyway. In either case, you're right. It's not even costing the LLM any measurable time or energy.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 2 days ago (3 children)

    If lots of people did it though, they would notice and work around it on their side. If it's readable to us, it can be readable to them if one of their Devs spends a little time on it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (30 replies)