bonoboTP

15 ms·

331.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
You need better arguments than "you don't like to use it yourself and prefer writing yourself" or some metaphysical voodoo-like theory (analogous to tribes that refuse to be captured on a photo) whereby feeding your words to
332.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
No, I simply think the person is not familiar with these concepts, which is not a crime, it's okay to be wrong, I didn't want to banish that person from here, just corrected the statement. But might have been also a brain fart. Ha
333.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
Analogy "it's not GAN, it's transformer!" - - "it's not a recursive implementation, it's object oriented!" if you are more familiar with CS. Or "it's not 4-wheel-drive, it's diesel!&quo
334.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
It's rare. It's mostly, "but it will never be able to do X" (when it can already do X), or it uses too much water (while having no idea or reference point to what amount is much), or other climate things, or non-progress
335.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
Transformers are an architecture and GANs are a training method for the architecture. There are GAN Transformers.
336.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
There is RLHF with a model that's trained to emulate a human evaluator, but the evaluator is not really trained jointly with the main model to adapt to its distribution and tell it from real text. Though I'm sure there are some ni
337.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
It can definitely plan such things. Because agentic systems don't have to output a book all at once. The mainstream still lives 1-2 years in the past. Agents can plan out a narrative draft, write it out section by section, maybe out of
338.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
This is AI written. Next time just paste your prompt or conversation with the AI that wrote the article. I'll then converse with Claude about it myself. There is no need for this intermediary.
339.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
Yes, definitely. It's too happy to just go and diligently work based on too little information, instead of asking questions first. And it makes many people think that they don't have to specify what they actually want, and the AI
340.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
True, but it's easier to get lazy and to just wire it up to an automatic engagement farming loop with no human input. Imagine the worst form of audience capture possible.
341.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
It is moving so fast that your experience with older models is irrelevant today. Sorry. Claude Code, Fable 5, xhigh reasoning, allow it to run the full CI, end to end and benchmark, it will not make silly mistakes (or only occasionally). Al
342.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
> If it moves something in you, that's what mainly matters. This is a values question. Many would say that literature has a role in modeling certain behaviors and teaching lessons that are functional in society. Basically the fables
343.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
There are different types of research. Negative AI results are not like Michelson-Morley experiment in physics that can positively establish the lack of something. It's more of a craft, the "make it work" style of thing. Give
344.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
No, good researchers also dismiss such things, because most research out there is crap. If you reward negative results, you'll have a flood of them, and the reason that they are negative will mostly look like it's incompetence (an
345.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
Everyone says this in the abstract but to concrete examples they shug and say, of course that approach doesn't work, they did X, Y, Z wrong, they should have given it more effort, it could have worked if done properly / this can o
346.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
1. I said in my hypothetical it would not reproduce exact content. 2. Okay, others find it useful. So what?
347.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
If it never regurgitated the exact same thing, would you accept AI then?
348.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
A lot of knowledge in such niches has never been written down. Papers don't contain it. Tacit knowledge, it's in unpublished config files and unpublished experiments that some prof or PhD student remembers, all the things that are
349.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
That's not unique to tech startups. Almost nothing in terms of explicit methodology has any effect on education outcomes. The literature on education research is of abysmal quality too.
350.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
There is not a huge market of people who actually want to learn something on their own motivation. Get some piece of paper, yes. So the huge market will only materialize if the degree granting institutions adopt something like this.
351.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
Let's not mix copyright and trademark in mixed phrases like "infringing on a copyright / trademark". The two are very different concepts with different goals. The main question in the "AI image generator generates a
352.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
Ok, then next question is why are you in academia? To share knowledge with humanity, bring the Promethean light to the mortals or something I guess. But then if they use it for productive things that make money, that's too smelly, that
353.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
Patents were invented to incentivize disclosure of inventions and prevent extended secrecy. In exchange for the public disclosure (which allows others to experiment with the idea without selling yet), you get to keep exclusivity for N years
354.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
Why did you sign off your copyright to ACM then? If you kept the copyright and prevented others from distributing your work, you could be the sole distributor and negotiate the price with the AI company yourself.
355.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
The verbatim reproduction is clearly a red herring and not the main use case. Nobody reads novels (or science papers) by prompting ChatGPT to give the next paragraph. Derivative work or transformative? It's not the same.
356.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
They can't apply for a patent in those categories, so they have no way of preventing others from reading their text (or using a program to process the text, and compute statistical properties), and using the ideas in other contexts (wi
357.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
Copyright protects against reprinting or reproducing the wording and expression, not using the idea expressed in there in novel contexts.
358.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
Nope, and I'd also download cars.
359.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
I like open models for sure. I support free software as well. But using published knowledge to solve new problems was never disallowed, even for profit. Today, a for-profit company, e.g. a gigantic Big Pharma company can have their employee
360.
by bonoboTP 3mo ago
If you don't hold a patent for the use of the knowledge you published publicly, you can't prevent others from using the knowledge. You enjoy the prestige attached to the idea that you're an academic who participates in giving

More ›