this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2024
323 points (92.6% liked)

Technology

58123 readers
4130 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 22 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Every single one of us, as kids, learned the concept of "garbage in, garbage out"; most likely in terms of diet and food intake.

And yet every AI cultist makes the shocked pikachu face when they figure out that trying to improve your LLM by feeding it on data generated by literally the inferior LLM you're trying to improve, is an exercise in diminishing returns and generational degradation in quality.

Why has the world gotten both "more intelligent" and yet fundamentally more stupid at the same time? Serious question.

[–] LANIK2000@lemmy.world 14 points 4 hours ago

Because the people with power funding this shit have pretty much zero overlap with the people making this tech. The investors saw a talking robot that aced school exams, could make images and videos and just assumed it meant we have artificial humans in the near future and like always, ruined another field by flooding it with money and corruption. These people only know the word "opportunity", but don't have the resources or willpower to research that "opportunity".

[–] Moah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 hours ago

Oh no. Anyways...

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 17 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

oh no are we gonna have to appreciate the art of human beings? ew. what if they want compensation‽

[–] celsiustimeline@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

If mainstream blogs are writing about it, what would make someone think that AI companies haven't thoroughly dissected the problem and are already working on filtering out AI fingerprints from the training data set? If they can make a sophisticated LLM, chances are they can find methods to XOR out generated content.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 7 points 3 hours ago

What would make me think that they haven't "thoroughly dissected" it yet is that I'm a skeptic, and since I'm a skeptic I don't immediately and without evidence believe that every industry is capable of identifying, dissecting, and solving every problem with its products.

[–] brey1013@lemmy.world 6 points 9 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Tamkish@programming.dev 6 points 8 hours ago
[–] Rider@eviltoast.org 3 points 9 hours ago

Sooner or later it is supposed to happen, but I don't think we are quite there....Yet.

[–] levzzz@lemmy.world 13 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Fake news, just like that one time Nightshade "killed" stable diffusion (literally had no effect) Flux came out not long ago and it's better than ever

[–] Sabata11792@ani.social 1 points 40 minutes ago (1 children)

At this point the synthetic data is good enough to intentionally be used for training LLMs.

[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 2 points 35 minutes ago

Yeah, just filter out the bad generated images and feed the good ones again, until the model learns how to produce only good ones.

[–] mac@lemm.ee 8 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

is it not relatively trivial to pre-vet content before they train it? at least with aigen text it should be.

[–] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 18 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

The problem is these AI companies currently exist on the business model of not paying for information, and that generally includes not wanting to pay content curators.

Google is probably the only one in a position to potentially outsource by making everyone solve a "does this hand look normal to you" CAPTCHA

They can try and train AI to detect AI, but that's also difficult.

[–] FMT99@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

So it's not a problem with AI. It's just a problem for some mayfly companies that try to profit from the latest trend?

[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 1 points 33 minutes ago

As always.

The model isn't dying, its the way these parasites want it to work that is dying.

[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago

It depends on what you are looking for. Identifying AI generated data is generally hard, though it can be done in specific cases. There is no mathematical difference between the 1s and 0s that encoded AI generated data and any other data. Which is why these model collapse ideas are just fantasy. There is nothing magical about any data that makes it "poisonous" to AI. The kernel of truth behind these ideas is not likely to matter in practice.

[–] tee9000@lemmy.world 9 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Kind of like how true thoughts and opinions on complex topics are boiled down to digestible concepts for others to understand who then perpetuate those concepts without understanding them and the meaning degrades and we dont think anymore, just repeat stuff in social media comments.

Side note... this article sucks and seems like it was ai generated. Repetitive and no author credit? Just says it was originally posted elsewhere.

Generative AI isnt in danger of being killed as this clickbait titled suggests... just hindered.

[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)
[–] tee9000@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

By chance, is that based on other peoples succinct social media comments on ai?

[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

No. I simply don't see a plausible scenario for that. The social media comments are quite deplorable. You really have to look for bubbles with educated people. I don't know why this gets so much traction. Maybe it's because the copyright industry likes it, or maybe it feeds some psychological need like Intelligent Design.

[–] tee9000@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Cant blame me for asking :)

Seems like tools to recognize ai content to prevent synthetic input avoids model degredation.

If those tools are up to the task then i would agree it probably doesnt hinder model training. Not sure what the reality is, or if the need for those tools creates a barrier to entry for a significant portion of those trying to create models with internet-crawled data.

[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

There is no problem with ingesting synthetic data. Well, at least none coming from the fact that it is synthetic. If there was a fundamental difference between the 1s and 0s encoding synthetic data and the 1s and 0s encoding any other data, then you could easily filter it. But there isn't. The ideas that this community has are magical thinking.

[–] tee9000@lemmy.world 1 points 45 minutes ago

I want to be constructive so:

Please consider the unintentional disinformation people create when they try to sound like they know what they are talking about. Contributing to discussion is difficult on complex topics.

Its perfectly natural to want to continue a conversation to the point where you might fill in some details instead of researching a topic or not responding. But this is seriously harmful in the age of disinformation. Theres plenty i dont know. But there are tools expressly created to identify ai content to avoid using it in model training. The consequence of using synthetic data is the only topic in the article you are commenting on. Either read the article or please dont feel like you need to come up with a response.

[–] pastermil@sh.itjust.works 12 points 15 hours ago

More like degenerative AIs

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 100 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It is their own fault for poisoning the internet with their slop.

[–] db2@lemmy.world 51 points 1 day ago (6 children)

In case anyone doesn't get what's happening, imagine feeding an animal nothing but its own shit.

[–] leftzero@lemmynsfw.com 7 points 14 hours ago

Photocopy of a photocopy is my go-to metaphor for model collapse.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 4 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

"Model collapse" is just a fancy way of saying "our stupid ideas are bad and nobody wants them."

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] rickdg@lemmy.world 27 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Old news? Seems to be a subject of several papers for some time now. Synthetic data has been used successfully already for very specific domains.

[–] SomeGuy69@lemmy.world 3 points 12 hours ago

Yup, old news and wrong news. Also so many people who hate AI but don't understand how it works. Pretty disappointing for a technology community.

[–] ptz@dubvee.org 156 points 1 day ago (10 children)

Let's go, already!

How you can help: If you run a website and can filter traffic by user agent, get a list of the known AI scrapers agent strings and selectively redirect their requests to pre-generated AI slop. Regular visitors will see the content and the LLM scraper bots will scrape their own slop and, hopefully, train on it.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] casmael@lemm.ee 34 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

…………………. Good?

[–] emiellr@lemm.ee 1 points 8 hours ago

Tbh I'm a bit lost on the purpose of this

[–] Hugin@lemmy.world 17 points 20 hours ago

The solution for this is usually counter training. Granted my experience is on the opposite end training ai vision systems to id real objects.

So you train up your detector ai on hand tagged images. When it gets good you use it to train a generator ai until the generator is good at fooling the detector.

Then you train the detector on new tagged real data and the new ai generated data. Once it's good at detection again you train the generator ai on the new detector.

Repeate several times and you usually get a solid detector and a good generator as a side effect.

The thing is you need new real human tagged data for each new generation. None of the companies want to generate new human tagged data sets as it's expensive.

[–] CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world 65 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Model collapse is just a euphemism for “we ran out of stuff to steal”

[–] Snowclone@lemmy.world 30 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

It's more ''we are so focused on stealing and eating content, we're accidently eating the content we or other AI made, which is basically like incest for AI, and they're all inbred to the point they don't even know people have more than two thumb shaped fingers anymore."

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago

All such news make me want to live to the time when our world is interesting again. Real AI research, something new instead of the Web we have, something new instead of the governments we have. It's just that I'm scared of what's between now and then. Parasites die hard.

[–] EgoNo4@lemmy.world 76 points 1 day ago (2 children)

More like... Degenerative AI *ba dum tsss

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] emiellr@lemm.ee 0 points 8 hours ago

Wait now hold on a minute. Why would I want to do this? Is this activism by people against LLMs in general or..? I'm confused as to why I would want to do this.

load more comments
view more: next ›