riskable

her goal isn't to get them to stop, it's to get them to recognize what garbage writing is and how to fix it so it isn't garbage anymore.

I wish English teachers did this instead of... Whatever TF they're doing instead.

This is something they should've been doing all along. Long before the invention of LLMs or computers.

Move to Japan 👍

To be fair, The Last Algorithm does sound like it could be a gripping tale to an AI.

I use Kubuntu with KDE Connect. It lets me control everything using my phone 👍

I can play/pause whatever from my lock screen and can use my phone's keyboard like it's connected to the computer. It's fantastic 👍

Dumb Restrictions on Media will always be Dumb Restrictions on Media.

We the people mostly won the DRM wars of the early 2000s. You do not want to legitimize that technology. It only helps big corporations/evil monopolies. It will never be a good thing for humanity as a whole.

~~stolen~~ copied creations

When something is stolen the one who originally held it no longer has it anymore. In other words, stealing covers physical things.

Copying is what you're talking about and this isn't some pointless pedantic distinction. It's an actual, real distinction that matters from both a legal/policy standpoint and an ethical one.

Stop calling copying stealing! This battle was won by every day people (Internet geeks) against Hollywood and the music industry in the early 2000s. Don't take it away from us. Let's not go back to the, "you wouldn't download a car" world.

I dunno. It's better than their old, non-AI slop 🤷

Before, I didn't really understand what they were trying to communicate. Now—thanks to AI—I know they weren't really trying to communicate anything at all. They were just checking off a box 👍

My argument is that the LLM is just a tool. It's up to the person that used that tool to check for copyright infringement. Not the maker of the tool.

Big company LLMs were trained on hundreds of millions of books. They're using an algorithm that's built on that training. To say that their output is somehow a derivative of hundreds of millions of works is true! However, how do you decide the amount you have to pay each author for that output? Because they don't have to pay for the input; only the distribution matters.

My argument is that is far too diluted to matter. Far too many books were used to train it.

If you train an AI with Stephen King's works and nothing else then yeah: Maybe you have a copyright argument to make when you distribute the output of that LLM. But even then, probably not because it's not going to be that identical. It'll just be similar. You can't copyright a style.

Having said that, with the right prompt it would be easy to use that Stephen King LLM to violate his copyright. The point I'm making is that until someone actually does use such a prompt no copyright violation has occurred. Even then, until it is distributed publicly it really isn't anything of consequence.

Nah just own it. You only need to kill this one person to obtain your shapeshifter dreams!

Admit it, "I'd say sorry but I'd still pull the trigger." 😁

Umm... AI has been used to improve compilers dating all the way back to 2004:

https://github.com/shrutisaxena51/Artificial-Intelligence-in-Compiler-Optimization

Sorry that I had to prove you wrong so overwhelmingly, so quickly 🤷

To add to this: It's much more likely that AI will be used to improve compilers—not replace them.

Aside: AI is so damned slow already. Imagine AI compiler times... Yeesh!