@stephenpa I do like playful names, and I’m intrigued but also a tad skeptical… would that be contrasted with prototypes that are designed to *not* provoke a reaction/conversation? And would the reaction be the purpose rather than learning something about product fit and understanding?
So many questions 😅
Per Axbom
@EFreethought
Not a bad one. I'd add that to possible and plausible. But not preferable 😉
@failedLyndonLaRouchite
@c0n7ra @owlchemist @WideEyes
Scraping from physical books is almost as easy now with immediate OCR. I take photos with my iPhone to copy text. By extension, the way to copyright a work then is to hide it. And nobody can buy your photos for use in their online articles....
But I agree, all of these things are historically social constructs by humans to protect something referrred to as intellectual property, and it's an interesting thought experiment to consider if we have to reinvent what author ownership even is anymore.
I've been blogging since 1997 and of course have always been aware that my content can pop up most anywhere. The way for me to demonstrate ownership has been to actually publish online to create a visible trail of references with dates. That also means I haven't expected monetary compensation for my writing though - which writers tend to do.
Still, as an advocate of ethics I am fond of the idea of consent, and am less impresssed when others make money by using my content without my prior approval. These days I use a creative commons license. If OpenAI were to follow that, their tool would have to apply the same license when ingesting my content. But all this mostly goes to show that licensing carries very little weight in the real world. Power and social standing does.
@owlchemist @WideEyes @c0n7ra
Not sure anyone has to show evidence when OpenAI themselves openly admit to using copyrighted work?
What they are doing is claiming that this falls under the American Fair Use doctrine. The many ongoing court cases will tell us more, although I expect it can take 5-10 years for many of those cases to be finalised.
When it comes to image generators there have been many instances of copyright symbols being generated, as well as the Getty Images watermark. An image, or text, of course does not need the copyright symbol to be considered copyrighted, but it is the type of evidence that gives certainty to the supposition.
Researchers have also shown that chapters of many copyrighted books, such as Harry Potter, can be reproduced *almost verbatim using ChatGPT.
https://www.theregister.com/AMP/2023/05/03/openai_chatgpt_copyright/
@SuperMoosie @nuncio
Of course it is. I look forward to reading more about how this played out in five years 😅
@grammasaurus Found out it's actually a book making the point that those early prototypes are "something else".
"The concept of pretotyping was founded in 2009 by Google Innovation Agitator and Doctor of ‘Failosophy’, Alberto Savoia, through Google and Stanford University. After several years of refining pretotyping at Google, Alberto became actively involved with the Stanford Technology Ventures Program, teaming up with lecturers Richard Cox Braden and Tina Seelig. Over the next few years, Alberto and the team worked to perfect the techniques (and the pedagogy) of pretotyping with Stanford students and Silicon Valley companies."
An Innovation Agitator and who is a doctor in 'Failosophy'. I see what's going on.
https://www.exponentially.com/what-is-pretotyping
@nyx Fair. I believe we'll see many mannerisms of dealing with the fallout, and I believe much of course will depend on how easy it is for another human being to quickly step into your role and do a good job. Rather than the AI stepping in.
I'm still blown away by how much banks are still dependent on Cobol for core systems, and most people who know Cobol are retired, and will still sometimes get called in to fix things... https://thefinanser.com/2017/06/will-last-cobol-guy-turn-banks-lights
But of course I have no idea. This was my tongue-in-cheek way of addressing modern truthisms that I keep seeing everywhere. Did not expect it to get this much traction. 😅
I've been seeing the term "pretotype" and tried to understand why that was being used in place of prototype.
Then I found an article that intended to explain the difference. The peak 'splainer was this part:
"One of the most famous examples of pretotyping is that of the Palm Pilot. When he had the idea for this product, the founder of Palm Computing, Jeff Hawkins, didn’t rush to build the device. He ran pretotypes to make sure that a) the product would work functionally and b) that people would actually want to buy and use them. He did this by mocking up a Palm Pilot using pieces of wood and paper, carrying it around for a few weeks and “using” it to see if it was valuable and to test other people’s interest in it. "
Ah, so exactly like a prototype. Well, that clears things up.
@nuncio Haha, fair point. 😊
Though this made me think of banking systems still using the Cobol programming language, and people getting called back from retirement to fix issues.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-banks-cobol-idUSKBN17C0D8
@mjj @fngrlngpote
Agree about this point. The amount of sh*t in the world will also escalate and multiply out of control. But there will also be more fatal, dangerous and embarrassing mistakes because of it. I'm now thinking for example of the lawyer who used ChatGPT to draft his case.
I believe these mistakes will slow down the specific threat everybody keeps talking about.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65735769
@failedLyndonLaRouchite
I believe the point here is that I of course have no knowledge of the future. Much like anyone. My post is a play on this very common message being repeated across the web and in news articles:
"AI isn't going to replace your job - but someone using AI will".
This statement is often lauded as an obvious and irreversible truth. What I'm doing with my playful post is challenging that assumption. We are seeing many reports of the failure of AI to adhere to facts, of misplaced trust leading to critical mistakes (lawyer trusting sources), and the exploitation of others work to make the systems, potentially putting you in harms way when you rely on the non-consensual sourcing of other people's output. And that's not mentioning bias.
As an example: it has been said for almost a decade that radiologists will be replaced by AI. At the same time it has been shown that AI won't detect the long tail of diseases that radiologists pick up on. Also, even experienced radiologists who trust AI decisions do not challenge them enough, and hence a radiologist working with AI can make more severe mistakes with than without AI.
From the research cited below: "When the purported AI suggested the wrong category, their accuracy fell to less than 20%. Experienced radiologists—those with more than 15 years of experience on average—saw their accuracy fall from 82% to 45.5% when the purported AI suggested the incorrect category."
My intent is to tell another story, also based on real-world data, but I agree that anything that is said about the future is not a definite story. Which is also an important learning. The future belongs to all of us, and is not something inevitable that tech giants control.
I think Jenna Burell brings home this last point well:
"When powerful tech figures link arms behind an attention-grabbing statement alleging AI superpowers, they are also saying, as the Wizard of Oz did, “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.” They are saying “the power resides in the machine.” They are distracting us from the enormous amount of wealth and power they stand to gain from the rise of AI — and from the fact that it doesn’t have to be this way. They would like to skip past today’s real work, that of tackling the challenges and wrestling with the possibilities that will shape the world to come. Instead, they ask us to look to the future — but they forget that the future belongs to us all."
Sources for my assertions:
Why AI will not replace radiologists
https://towardsdatascience.com/why-ai-will-not-replace-radiologists-c7736f2c7d80
Will Artificial Intelligence Replace Radiologists?
https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/10.1148/ryai.2019190058
AI bias may impair radiologist accuracy on mammogram
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2023-05-ai-bias-impair-radiologist-accuracy.html
Do We Expect More from Radiology AI than from Radiologists?
https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/full/10.1148/ryai.2021200221
AI Will Change Radiology, but It Won’t Replace Radiologists
https://hbr.org/2018/03/ai-will-change-radiology-but-it-wont-replace-radiologists
Artificial Intelligence and the Ever-Receding Horizon of the Future
https://techpolicy.press/artificial-intelligence-and-the-ever-receding-horizon-of-the-future/
I keep on stumbling on beautiful writing today. This story about craft, shared by Cat Hicks, PhD, is such a moving reflection on efficiency vs cadence, recognising and seeing the world around you, effort, toil, output vs wellbeing, letting people participate, dignity and of course: family.
« Grandpa could also recognize trees at remarkable distances: beech, birch, maple, oak. He could tell if they were growing healthy. He could tell if they were growing sick. He told me: “it’s when they just don’t look happy.” »
« In the factory, he told me he used to frequently stop people from trying to work faster or differently because it would cause a ruckus, a ripple effect, a mess, he said. It took me a long time to read between the lines and realize that in my grandpa’s world back then, a disruption to the assembly line rhythms got somebody killed. So he kept everyone on cadence, rather than simply pursuing speed. »
@grimalkina
Beautiful writing. Beautiful story. Beautiful message. Thank you for writing this. It's so much of what I often want to say but struggle to articulate. Will be pointing to your post when I'm stuck.
@stripey
There's also the part where you are happy that people appreciate you and it feels embarassing to charge money for that.
The struggle is a testament to reflection around fairness and honesty. 😊
@stripey
And a fifteen-minute job that won't come undone in a week, but actually hold water (pun intended) for many years.
That's definitely how I reason around my own rates.
This post by 🐝 Heather Burns is everything the world needs right now.
Read it. Understand its message. Take it to heart.
Hint: it's about decision-making and protecting lives.
I myself will be putting those two paragraphs she highlighted from Gene Kranz' speech on my wall.
@Loukas @hakona @thomas_ekstrom I've understood knugen to be a way of making fun of his dyslexia, but also that most people aren't aware of how the "nickname" came to be.
I will be expecting Nobel Prize winners to boycott the award ceremony (on December 10) after the committee’s bizarre decision to invite Russia’s ambassador, along with the ambassadors of Belarus and Iran. This year’s event is now already ill-fated.
Boycotts have been announced by a several party leaders in Sweden. The only one announcing that she will take part is Ebba Busch, Leader of the Christian Democrats and Minister for Energy, Business and Industry. No final decisions have been communicated from Magdalena Andersson (Social Democrats), or prime minister Ulf Kristersson (Moderate party). Johan Pehrson (Liberal Party) has – on X – vaguely suggested he may not attend.
@anders Morrn morrn!
@fngrlngpote
Yes, a possible timeline. Will depend on how costly the mistake is, and how quickly regulation will prevent the tool from accessing content without consent.