Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)C

ClamDrinker

@ ClamDrinker @lemmy.world

Posts
0
Comments
268
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Lutris maintainer: "I've removed the Claude co-authorship from the commits a few days ago. So good luck figuring out what's generated and what is not."

    Jump

  • I'm kind of torn on this, because on the one side I can see the developer's troubles. If they have 30 years of experience and they considered the impact of using it they will most likely know how to use it properly and ethically. Indeed many of the issues people have with AI are a kind of redirected anger, when really they are issues with capitalism, incompetency, or digital illiteracy. And the person posting the issue seems purely there to fan that flame rather than actually contribute. Something maintainers could use just as little as slop authored PRs.

    But on the other hand, being open about the usage is a must. It's the price to pay for going against the grain. If your ideals and means are pure, they should be defendable and scrutinizable to reasonable people, and there should be no issue with that in the long term. Hiding the usage will create doubt about authorship, and make defenses harder to point at, while it won't stop the horde.

  • Lutris maintainer: "I've removed the Claude co-authorship from the commits a few days ago. So good luck figuring out what's generated and what is not."

    Jump

  • The thing is, many of these guidelines are related to finalized products fully created by AI. As in, the AI produced a written or drawn work at the end of it that on it's own is the product (Eg. an article or an image). This will probably apply to code in some reasonable way, but at the end of the day there's only so many ways to write code since it's syntax and not as flexible as language. It actually has to produce something that works, so there are far less finite arrangements.

    If you were to compare code written by two people at two companies, doing a very similar project, you wouldn't be surprised to find two pieces of code doing almost the same thing in the same syntax, barring synthetic sugar like naming and coding conventions. Neither will likely have violated the other's copyright since simultaneous invention is a thing. And if they happened to have similar prior experiences, it's even more likely.

    Likewise, the way the code was incorporated into a project as a whole might sufficiently constitute a human contribution, and perhaps even the more important contribution. You likely wouldn't retain the copyright on the specific snippet, but rarely are small code snippets enough on their own to claim copyright over to begin with. It's the program or library or system as a whole that's the finished product.

  • What phrases/sentences instantly reveal someone as a chud?

    Jump

  • "Wow, don't take things so seriously!"

  • What phrases/sentences instantly reveal someone as a chud?

    Jump

  • It's just an appeal to authority. There are plenty of silent majorities that are real, but often the arguments that built those silent majorities are sound on their own and are much better to argue with, so there is no reason to point out a silent majority.

    Like, not being a flat earther is a silent majority, because 99% of people don't even think, talk or discuss such ideas, but you don't need to rely on a silent majority to debunk it.

  • Xbox as a platform is officially dead

    Jump

  • I mean, your post says "Forcing windows down Xbox gamers throats". So people that are already in the locked down Xbox ecosystem, not people that already know that and avoid Xbox. Xbox is just Windows but locked down. It's both Microsoft.

    I completely agree people should just go for a PC, but if someone was buying Xbox already, they aren't in the mindset. So if they're going to buy Xbox anyways, having a device that's not locked down to some console OS means they can switch at any time and rid themselves of Xbox, since it's your device. To me that's definitely an improvement over the status quo, even if other better options were already available.

  • Xbox as a platform is officially dead

    Jump

  • The contracts for the Steam Machine were already locked in before RAM and GPU shortage even started, which means they will (like other consoles) be able to provide a reserved amount of devices at a fixed and lower price. But likewise, this also means that for any console that did not have contracts locked in before shit went down, will suffer massively from this. Thus looking at current prices for hardware isn't indicative of how much prices will rise. Steam Machine could be the most affordable gaming device of the next decade.

    But Valve also isn't stupid. PC has the unique position where it has one of the longest backlogs of backwards compatible games and applications. Which means you don't need top of the line hardware. People are still gaming on 10 year old PCs, so the hardware for those will be much more affordable and still be able to play most games. Especially indie games with their insane price to performance to quality ratios. If top line gaming on PC becomes economically unviable, it will simply move down a notch.

  • Xbox as a platform is officially dead

    Jump

  • You realize PC is not just Windows, right? It's Windows, Linux, Mac.

    Windows might be the most used PC platform but game developer are well aware attaching their success to Windows is not the right move. And that's exactly the kind of freedom PC gives that consoles do not.

  • ..?

    Jump

  • At the end of the day the deeds define the word, not the other way around. Not everyone will use the word correctly or appropriately. It's why only you yourself can truly categorize as such, but at that point you must come to terms with what that means, positively or negatively.

    The bias thing is a real problem, but also sometimes not. It all depends on the context. Some people with unreasonable opinions will absolutely waste your time by never accepting difficult realities and talking around it, so identifying a mindset that's immune to self reflection can be useful. But similarly if a label is all that's needed to dismiss an opinion also is not very reasonable. But it's how some people operate. So sometimes not standing behind a label can be more fruitful as not to entice those presuppositions.

  • Block lays off nearly half its staff because of AI. Its CEO said most companies will do the same

    Jump

  • Firing employees for AI really is the company equivalent of a darwin award huh.

  • I am a 15-year-old girl. Let me show you the vile misogyny that confronts me on social media every day | Anonymous

    Jump

  • Abhorrent to hear such a young person having to deal with this. It gets easier as you grow older, but it never stops being a vile state of things. Nobody should have to grow 'thick skin' to just participate, as wonderful aspects of their personality can die with it.

    The gut reaction is to point to the easy and straightforward option, to just leave. But in the end this doesn't solve anything. This is exactly how many safe spaces die, on top of it blaming victims. Once abusers are let in and tolerated, the victims will start leaving if they can. And eventually, the space is no longer that of the victims, but that of the abusers. This happens with nazis at a bar, smokers at restaurants, assholes on the road, unruly people in the train. It leads to a society where everyone nice just sits at home because that's ultimately the last safe place left.

    The hard truth is that the group that doesn't take a stand and accepts in the abusers, is the only place we can look at for a solution. But there's no easy way to get to them often. If they let it get this far, it's essentially pointless. (The big social media platforms for sure). I think the only real alternative is to build alternative safe places. Reach out to friends and other victims. Let them know there is another place where they can actually feel safe. But it will be hard and grueling. At first it might seem like you are alone, that nobody shares your grievances. But it takes time. Years even. You might get assholes trying to get in anyways, that have to be harshly rejected to keep the spirit alive. You might get sabotaged from outside. It's tough - but as far as solutions go, it's a real one.

    I consider Lemmy one of these places. And I think it's very important for anyone to realize they're in a community built on those grounds. It must always be protected with full force. From the smallest friend group, to the biggest of governments. Even when that's hard to do.

  • everyone hates AI

    Jump

  • It can certainly be used for that, I will admit. But no that isn't my intention. I hear many good stories on that front of teachers that have gotten a really good nose for AI and are using it as learning moments for their students. The world is filled with ways to cheat, and teachers are well aware of that. In the end, the process to unlearn them from cheating with AI is the same as cheating in conventional manners, is all I'm saying.

  • everyone hates AI

    Jump

  • Not OP, but I'm glad you're getting empowered. That's imo the best use for it. It's crazy to me how many people write this off, not understanding many aspiring creatives need these kinds of stepping stones to stay motivated. Because logically, if what you make takes off and becomes popular, at some point human employees are probably the better option than AI. And as you said, without AI you might have never taken the first leap. So it would end up creating more livelihood for creatives than taking away.

  • everyone hates AI

    Jump

  • The thing is that image generators aren't even such big environmental hazards. They are often comparable to other activities like gaming, since you can often run them locally. At scale that's also a bad thing to have, but we don't get people up in arms about many equivalent things.

    It's the biggest LLMs that are extraordinarily inefficient, since you need entire compute clusters to get those running. There's just not really a way to put every AI tech into the same box except by not caring about the truth, so it makes the people that don't draw that nuance look very scummy to people aware of that nuance.

  • everyone hates AI

    Jump

  • No disagreement here. I'm simply saying because you are more likely to be misled now than ever, being lazy about it isn't an option anymore, and teachers can use that fact to drive the point home stronger. In the past if you were lazy about checking sources and verifying information, chances were much higher you still got somewhat valid information that didn't harm your life down the road. Now you might just hurt yourself by putting glue on your pizza. Not saying I desire that, but the consequences of intellectual laziness have never been bigger, so the emphasis on teaching understanding must match that, since the alternative is being taken advantage of.

    #3 is very important, as this is the core thing a school should teach. But lets not kid ourselves that kids weren't cheating their way out of homework since the start of time 😄

  • everyone hates AI

    Jump

  • I fully agree. I still remember the time when using Photoshop was seen by some as not being "real artist", because "any idiot with a mouse can draw now". I'm not under any illusion this will last forever, the negative sentiment is boiling because of the bubble and it's negative externalities, not by the technology itself. So once that bursts, things will hopefully be a lot more peaceful.

  • everyone hates AI

    Jump

  • This isn't a problem with AI though, it's a problem with the people cutting trained technicians. In places where such incompetent people don't decide that, you get the same number of trained technicians accepting (and being a part of) a change that gives them slightly more accurate findings, resulting in lives being saved overall. Which is typically what health workers want to begin with.

  • everyone hates AI

    Jump

  • I don't believe that. What I'm saying is that these are all people I work with look very critically and skeptically at the world, as that's pretty much an inherent requirement for the creative industry. We all know what AI is and what it does, and most arguments against it hold no water to people with a realistic view of the industry to the point it simply cannot be black and white like some claim it to be.

    There are a few good reasons to dislike AI, but those don't apply to all of AI. Some are value based, and other people have other values that are equally valid. And some can be avoided entirely. Like how you could ship packages with a coal rocket instead of a train on electricity, or just shipping less packages to begin with.

    There is trust and experience between one another in the industry that we aren't using it unnecessarily, wastefully, and incorrectly, and AI is not anywhere near a requirement by consumers nor healthy minded businesses.

  • everyone hates AI

    Jump

  • You are the exact person I didn't mean 😄 the first is a very valid reason to dislike AI.

  • everyone hates AI

    Jump

  • I never said it doesn't exist. I'm sorry people in your area are being negatively affected if so. But the point still stands. My experience is just as valid.