6 ms·

> It seems to me like he started out mad and looked to justify it. Yes, but that's neither surprising nor a reason to dismiss the anger. People get angry about

> It seems to me like he started out mad and looked to justify it. Yes, but that's neither surprising nor a reason to dismiss the anger. People get angry about DRM schemes in video games, even if the slowdown these cause is practically imperceptible. They're angry -- and Gruber acknowledges that factor too -- because a stranger manipulates what they regard as their own domain, without consent by or benefit to the owner. It might be another instance of consequentialism vs. honor ethics. Many consequentialists don't seem to understand that something that doesn't have demonstrable consequences can still have moral implications.

zahlman 1mo ago
> People get angry about DRM schemes in video games, even if the slowdown these cause is practically imperceptible. Any potential "slowdown" doesn't even come close to making the list of top reasons people get upset about DRM.
pjc50 1mo ago
Even if honor were real, LLMs do not have honor, and people using LLMs to write without disclosing that fact (or indeed at all, to some purists) do not have honor either. > because a stranger manipulates what they regard as their own domain, without consent by or benefit to the owner. It's LLM output! It's not your domain, it's the LLM owner's!
KaiserPro 1mo ago
> People get angry about DRM schemes Yes but thats a thing that degrades something in a catastrophic way, as in I can use the thing one day, and not the next. A different randomisation system on something that is a text generator which is designed to be unperceptable sounds like the people who are annoyed at FLAC vs MP3[1] Done right you won't know the difference, done badly and you will. [1] ex audio engineer, try me.
- porridgeraisin 1mo ago
  > try me Good luck explaining that one
- latexr 1mo ago
  > the people who are annoyed at FLAC vs MP3 What’s the story there? I didn’t know that was a thing and I’m curious to learn more.
  - Sharlin 1mo ago
    MP3 is lossy. FLAC is lossless. So obviously a certain type of people are going to make a religious war out of it.
    - KaiserPro 1mo ago
      Essentially yes. Flac takes a raw .wav and effectively zips it up to shave off a certain amount of space. (there are nuances, I think the compression scheme is designed for streaming.) mp3 is perceptual, so throws away the stuff that humans can't hear. This yields a much smaller file. However its all a sliding scale like PNG vs jpeg. a .jpg with a quality setting of 85 will be almost identical to a .png in visual quality. However if you then edit that jpeg, the image degrades and you start to see artifacts. (hence why memes look like shite as they get older) Its the same with mp3s if you compress the hell out of them, say 64kbit or lower adaptive, then you'll start to hear the tell tail "schlop" noise of mp3-like compression. You might notice it most with cymbals in drum kits. cymbals are wideband noise. as in there are loads of constituent frequencies so if you remove some of the "hidden" frequencies you tend to notice, so they sound more metallic, ironically. But, all of this is solvable, 256+kbit is more than enough, bonus points for higher sampling frequencies. (however you need a decoder that can actually do that sample rate...)
      - Tepix 1mo ago
        Interestingly, in a test c't magazine did a long time ago, the test audience preferred mp3 256kbit over the original.
        milesvp 1mo ago
        Could be c't magazine accidentally played the mp3 version louder. Human's have a known preference for louder music, and will tend to prefer louder samples over quieter samples. Rumor in the industry is that this was a trick MS used to try to push the WMA format, that they encoded some WMA samples used in some publicized tests at +3dB above the source sample.
wpietri 1mo ago
I get what you're saying, but I think it's ridiculous for people to think of LLM services generating text as either their own domain or something that they own. To the extent that it's anybody's, it's either Anthropic's (they run the service) or everybody's (in that we created the content it's remixing). Legally LLM prose isn't copyrightable for good reason.

zahlman 1mo ago

> People get angry about DRM schemes in video games, even if the slowdown these cause is practically imperceptible. Any potential "slowdown" doesn't even come close to making the list of top reasons people get upset about DRM.

pjc50 1mo ago

Even if honor were real, LLMs do not have honor, and people using LLMs to write without disclosing that fact (or indeed at all, to some purists) do not have honor either. > because a stranger manipulates what they regard as their own domain, without consent by or benefit to the owner. It's LLM output! It's not your domain, it's the LLM owner's!

KaiserPro 1mo ago

> People get angry about DRM schemes Yes but thats a thing that degrades something in a catastrophic way, as in I can use the thing one day, and not the next. A different randomisation system on something that is a text generator which is designed to be unperceptable sounds like the people who are annoyed at FLAC vs MP3[1] Done right you won't know the difference, done badly and you will. [1] ex audio engineer, try me.

porridgeraisin 1mo ago
> try me Good luck explaining that one
latexr 1mo ago
> the people who are annoyed at FLAC vs MP3 What’s the story there? I didn’t know that was a thing and I’m curious to learn more.
- Sharlin 1mo ago
  MP3 is lossy. FLAC is lossless. So obviously a certain type of people are going to make a religious war out of it.
  - KaiserPro 1mo ago
    Essentially yes. Flac takes a raw .wav and effectively zips it up to shave off a certain amount of space. (there are nuances, I think the compression scheme is designed for streaming.) mp3 is perceptual, so throws away the stuff that humans can't hear. This yields a much smaller file. However its all a sliding scale like PNG vs jpeg. a .jpg with a quality setting of 85 will be almost identical to a .png in visual quality. However if you then edit that jpeg, the image degrades and you start to see artifacts. (hence why memes look like shite as they get older) Its the same with mp3s if you compress the hell out of them, say 64kbit or lower adaptive, then you'll start to hear the tell tail "schlop" noise of mp3-like compression. You might notice it most with cymbals in drum kits. cymbals are wideband noise. as in there are loads of constituent frequencies so if you remove some of the "hidden" frequencies you tend to notice, so they sound more metallic, ironically. But, all of this is solvable, 256+kbit is more than enough, bonus points for higher sampling frequencies. (however you need a decoder that can actually do that sample rate...)
    - Tepix 1mo ago
      Interestingly, in a test c't magazine did a long time ago, the test audience preferred mp3 256kbit over the original.
      - milesvp 1mo ago
        Could be c't magazine accidentally played the mp3 version louder. Human's have a known preference for louder music, and will tend to prefer louder samples over quieter samples. Rumor in the industry is that this was a trick MS used to try to push the WMA format, that they encoded some WMA samples used in some publicized tests at +3dB above the source sample.

wpietri 1mo ago

I get what you're saying, but I think it's ridiculous for people to think of LLM services generating text as either their own domain or something that they own. To the extent that it's anybody's, it's either Anthropic's (they run the service) or everybody's (in that we created the content it's remixing). Legally LLM prose isn't copyrightable for good reason.