4 ms·

Today's Twitter repository is the forum equivalent of “Low-background steel”

2 points by ColinWright 3y ago

I'm sure the existing tweet-stream has "AI" authored tweets already, but that's going to explode. So just as people go hunting for steel that was made pre-1940s to avoid background radiation caused by nuclear tests and detonations, so today's Twitter corpus could be a treasure house of non-MLL generated text data. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-background_steel

Terr_ 3y ago
Certainly an interesting analogy. I think it remains to be seen whether enough people will care, as opposed to seeking new ways of doing things which aren't so reliant or sensitive on the training data. There is at least the hope of a negative feedback loop: Shitty internet-data to shitty-models which in turn don't survive long enough to pollute too much more.
NovaDudely 3y ago
This is a similar take to the issue on all AI systems. Mentions Low-background steel the same way. https://theluddite.org/#!post/the-snake-eats-itself https://theluddite.org/#!post/the-snake-eats-itself "The comparison to pre-Atom bomb steel/Low-background steel is not an original one but it is a very valid analogy. For those that are not aware, there is a big need in the medical sector for steel that was produced before 1945. This is because after the atom bomb was detonated, it produces a radioactive radionuclide that has spread around the world and has since tainted all steel produced after this point. In sensitive equipment this can be a big issue as the very materials on which equipment is made out of will throw out the functions it was designed to do. It is a strange side effect that few could have anticipated at the time. To the same point, how can we trust any text model trained on data after mid-2022? The reality is that we probably cannot or at least trust it less. If you can trust them at all. And it will only get worse as we "progress". Usually externalities take decades or centuries to catch up, the initially slow but now increasing temperature of the planet is a testament to that. I suspect we have produced a system that will face these issues in years. Computers have accelerated not only information but also the side effects. Go us! "

2 points by ColinWright 3y ago

Terr_ 3y ago

Certainly an interesting analogy. I think it remains to be seen whether enough people will care, as opposed to seeking new ways of doing things which aren't so reliant or sensitive on the training data. There is at least the hope of a negative feedback loop: Shitty internet-data to shitty-models which in turn don't survive long enough to pollute too much more.

NovaDudely 3y ago

This is a similar take to the issue on all AI systems. Mentions Low-background steel the same way. https://theluddite.org/#!post/the-snake-eats-itself https://theluddite.org/#!post/the-snake-eats-itself "The comparison to pre-Atom bomb steel/Low-background steel is not an original one but it is a very valid analogy. For those that are not aware, there is a big need in the medical sector for steel that was produced before 1945. This is because after the atom bomb was detonated, it produces a radioactive radionuclide that has spread around the world and has since tainted all steel produced after this point. In sensitive equipment this can be a big issue as the very materials on which equipment is made out of will throw out the functions it was designed to do. It is a strange side effect that few could have anticipated at the time. To the same point, how can we trust any text model trained on data after mid-2022? The reality is that we probably cannot or at least trust it less. If you can trust them at all. And it will only get worse as we "progress". Usually externalities take decades or centuries to catch up, the initially slow but now increasing temperature of the planet is a testament to that. I suspect we have produced a system that will face these issues in years. Computers have accelerated not only information but also the side effects. Go us! "