LLMs are AI by definition. There’s no muddying the waters calling them that.

Have you actually seen an ad for AI ever? Because I haven’t. I’ve seen ads mentioning that some system uses AI but not for AI itself.

Monke see AI in the title, monke downvote.

This is a hivemind. No doubt about it.

AI companies train their software on copyrighted content. They don’t spread direct copies of that content around.

It’s a false assumption that AI bubble popping means we suddenly stop using AI and all these data centres will be running idle.

We didn’t stop using the internet when the dotcom bubble burst either.

AI bubble is about companies being overvalued. Not about the underlaying technology being worthless. The bubble popping means these valuations get adjusted to more reasonable levels. Some companies will go under but not all of them and almost definitely not the big ones.

But can you run Doom on a rat? I bet you can.

Anyone who thinks you can avoid hearing about “the horrors” by leaving social media hasn’t tried leaving social media. This stuff is unavoidable. The only little control you have over it is the sheer volume of it that you wish to get firehosed by on a daily basis.

Forums are a social media subcategory.

When most people hear AI they think AGI and because a narrow-AI language model doesn’t perform the way they expect an AGI to they then say stuff like “it’s not intelligent” or “it’s not an AI”

AI as a term is about as broad as the term “plants” which contains everything from grass to giant redwoods. LLM is just a subcategory like conifers.

AI is not synonymous with LLM. AlphaFold figured out protein folding. It’s an AI but not an LLM.

Bans only work in paper. In practice they’re just making it slightly harder. If there’s an obstacle there’s also way around it.

It doesn’t matter that you personally don’t use it. Other people do and you can’t escape the influence they have on you no more than they can that of an LLM.

I also find it odd to have such a strong opinion about something you have zero first-hand experience of.

ChatGPT alone has over 800 million weekly users yet you doubt this because you personally don’t use one?

Risking your life to inconvenience other people is a weird form of fun I must say.

I’ve yet to detect even a hint of right-wing / nazi bias on Grok. I get that it’s a popular narrative but it simply just doesn’t hold true according to my experience. It’s not that much different from ChatGPT really - just slightly less restricted.

I’m not sure what this information is good for.

Nor can I figure out this level of unprovoked hostility toward a complete stranger, but looking through your moderation history made it pretty clear that it’s not personal but you’re just lashing out to cope with whatever personal issues you’re dealing with. I don’t like it but get it. I genuinely hope you find some peace, but I don’t want anything more to do with this, so don’t spend your time writing a response. I’ve had enough with trying to deal with mean people online.

Humans contributing tags for filters would be like fighting the tide with a spoon.

Isn’t that what you’re literally advocating for here? I don’t see the practical difference between having users reporting AI content versus users reporting AI content that isn’t correctly labeled as such.

I stand behind what I said. Give people the option to filter it out of their own feeds if they want to. I don’t wish to push my own content preferences onto people with different tastes. Curating your own feed is the way to go. Not top down control from the tech companies themselves.

Zero tolerance ban still requires a method of detecting AI content in order to enforce said ban. Having such detection system in place would then just as well give people the option to choose for themselves whether they want to see such content or not. Ofcourse such filter isn’t 100% accurate but neither is a total ban. Some of that content will always get through.

TikTok but without users.