Jump to content

A.I is here and it will make the world worse.


Trencher

Recommended Posts

ARGH......the latest Microsoft intrusion is *their* AI, Copilot.  A preview version was forced onto my desktop by the latest downgrade...I mean, Windows Update.  

 

FORTUNATELY it can be disabled.  For now.  But this is Microsoft, and they'll likely try to force it down our throats by making it a "core feature" of the OS....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 326
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

”ChatGPT, find me a girlfriend. A real one this time.”

 

Tinder Owner Signs ChatGPT Deal. Enjoy the AI Dating Tidal Wave

Quote

Match Group, the international conglomerate that owns Tinder, Hinge, OkCupid, and almost every other popular dating app, just inked a major partnership with OpenAI. The company shared only a few hazy details, saying AI will help employees with “work-related tasks.” The dating giant says it long term plan is to squeeze artificial intelligence into “literally everything” in its apps. Incorporating ChatGPT into its worker’s daily responsibilities is the first major step towards making online dating an AI-focused enterprise.

The company celebrated its new partnership with a press release written by ChatGPT and edited by Match Group’s Corporate Communications team (meaning it was written by MatchGroup’s communications team). It includes quotes supposedly penned by the AI itself, as though it has its own feelings about corporate strategy. “I’m thrilled that Match Group matched with me,” ChatGPT said. “Together, we’re not just breaking the ice; we’re melting it, and reshaping the way work gets done.”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a heck of an analogy the guy uses...the current processes are like a painter doing a portrait.  Time consuming, slow, EXPENSIVE, ergo extremely limited.  AI acts more like a photographer.  FAST, easy, relatively cheap barring extensive staging.  A good photographer is skilled...but by comparison to someone who does portraits?  Much less so.  

 

I also think the points about voice actors, and style designers...building looks for the characters...those will be hot jobs, but man, that's a MUCH smaller team, and it's a winner-take-all setup, much like writing original music scores.  The top composers have all the work they can ever want.

 

For short works, the point that anyone can do it...might well hold.  I can write a good scene.  I can write a passable short story.  But the longer forms?  Connecting things, keeping things moving, working through all the details?  Not so much, cuz I just haven't had the impetus.  I suggest, that'll hold true for video creators using AI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Elon Musk’s legal case against OpenAI is hilariously bad

Quote

There’s no agreement there — maybe it is true that OpenAI’s byzantine corporate structure that involves a nonprofit owning a for-profit corporation subverts the ideals laid out in this document, but Musk cannot sue over that since it is not a contract.

The breach of contract claim goes on to reference an email from Sam Altman to Elon Musk, which says the technology OpenAI develops would be used for “the good of the world,” to which Musk replied, “Agree on all.”

I asked a few lawyer friends if any of that looked like a contract, and most of them just made puzzled faces. This tracks with Musk’s increasingly fuzzy understanding of how contracts work; just yesterdaya judge told lawyers for X that its breach of contract case against the Centers for Combating Digital Hate involved “one of the most vapid extensions of law I’ve ever heard.”

This entire complaint is more like a 1L exam question than a real lawsuit — to the extent that the second cause of action is something called “promissory estoppel,” a concept that sets the hearts of law professors aflame and which comes up in the real world approximately never. The important thing to know is that the richest person in the world is now trying to tell a court that he somehow detrimentally relied upon the promises of a nonprofit when he donated millions of dollars to it with no written contract. This is, at the very least, extremely funny.

From there, the complaint continues to fade into a wet fart — there are some catchall state claims and then a final desperate cause of action for “accounting,” which has two elements under California law, one of which is that OpenAI has to owe Musk money. This is an unusual expectation for donations to a nonprofit, to say the least.

Anyway, my guess is that this case will continue to be a gold mine for law schools around the country because it is almost a certainty that OpenAI’s response will be another 1L favorite: a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for “failure to state a claim.”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some teachers are now using ChatGPT to grade papers

 

Quote

Writable lets teachers submit student essays for analysis by ChatGPT, which then provides commentary and observations on the work. The AI-generated feedback goes to teacher review before being passed on to students so that a human remains in the loop.

"Make feedback more actionable with AI suggestions delivered to teachers as the writing happens," Writable promises on its AI website. "Target specific areas for improvement with powerful, rubric-aligned comments, and save grading time with AI-generated draft scores." The service also provides AI-written writing-prompt suggestions: "Input any topic and instantly receive unique prompts that engage students and are tailored to your classroom needs."

Writable can reportedly help a teacher develop a curriculum, although we have not tried the functionality ourselves. "Once in Writable you can also use AI to create curriculum units based on any novel, generate essays, multi-section assignments, multiple-choice questions, and more, all with included answer keys," the site claims.

The reliance on AI for grading will likely have drawbacks. Automated grading might encourage some educators to take shortcuts, diminishing the value of personalized feedback. Over time, the augmentation from AI may allow teachers to be less familiar with the material they are teaching. The use of cloud-based AI tools may have privacy implications for teachers and students. Also, ChatGPT isn't a perfect analyst. It can get things wrong and potentially confabulate (make up) false information, possibly misinterpret a student's work, or provide erroneous information in lesson plans.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*sighs*

 

Department of Homeland Security Unveils Artificial Intelligence Roadmap, Announces Pilot Projects to Maximize Benefits of Technology, Advance Homeland Security Mission

 

US DHS attempts to use "AI"

Quote

The press release includes the usual incantations of "unprecedented speed and potential", "enormous opportunities" which have to be balanced against "risks". So, this seems like a good moment to remind everyone that that "potential" and "opportunities" always promised for "AI" are speculative, that the "unprecedented speed" is either illusory, if it's speed of progress (no LLMs aren't "smart" nor are they getting "smarter"), or BAD if it's speed of consolidation of wealth and power and despoiling of the physical and information environments. The press release also reassures us that the "DHS is committed to ensuring that its use of AI fully respects privacy, civil liberties, and civil rights, is rigorously tested to avoid bias, disparate impact, privacy harms, and other risks, and that it is understandable to the people we serve." Coming from DHS, I guess we call that civil liberties theater?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
 

Meta ‘discussed buying publisher Simon & Schuster to train AI’

Quote

Staff at technology company Meta discussed buying publishing house Simon & Schuster last year in order to procure books to train the company’s artificial intelligence tools, it has been reported.

According to recordings of internal meetings shared with the New York Times, managers, lawyers and engineers at Meta met on a near-daily basis between March and April 2023 to discuss how it could get hold of more data to train AI models. From the recordings, which were shared by an employee of the Mark Zuckerberg-owned company that owns Facebook and Instagram, the New York Times found that staff had discussed buying Simon & Schuster and some had debated paying $10 per book for the licensing rights to new titles.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Author granted copyright over book with AI-generated text—with a twist

Quote

Last October, I received an email with a hell of an opening line: “I fired a nuke at the US Copyright Office this morning.”

The message was from Elisa Shupe, a 60-year-old retired US Army veteran who had just filed a copyright registration for a novel she’d recently self-published. She’d used OpenAI's ChatGPT extensively while writing the book. Her application was an attempt to compel the US Copyright Office to overturn its policy on work made with AI, which generally requires would-be copyright holders to exclude machine-generated elements.

That initial shot didn’t detonate—a week later, the USCO rejected Shupe’s application—but she ultimately won out. The agency changed course earlier this month after Shupe appealed, granting her copyright registration for AI Machinations: Tangled Webs and Typed Words, a work of autofiction self-published on Amazon under the pen name Ellen Rae.

The novel draws from Shupe’s eventful life, including her advocacy for more inclusive gender recognition. Its registration provides a glimpse of how the USCO is grappling with artificial intelligence, especially as more people incorporate AI tools into creative work. It is among the first creative works to receive a copyright for the arrangement of AI-generated text.

“We’re seeing the Copyright Office struggling with where to draw the line,” intellectual property lawyer Erica Van Loon, a partner at Nixon Peabody, says. Shupe’s case highlights some of the nuances of that struggle—because the approval of her registration comes with a significant caveat.

The USCO’s notice granting Shupe copyright registration of her book does not recognize her as author of the whole text as is conventional for written works. Instead she is considered the author of the “selection, coordination, and arrangement of text generated by artificial intelligence.” This means no one can copy the book without permission, but the actual sentences and paragraphs themselves are not copyrighted and could theoretically be rearranged and republished as a different book.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...