Tagged: Akkoma
@wir @linuxtage
Ah, good to know. I wasn't aware the PDF file suggested anything đ
@wir @linuxtage Very cool to see! Thanks for pinging me and letting me know â€ïž
@Cloud68 @wir @linuxtage
Thanks, there is a PDF linked on that web page that should work I think?
@david_chisnall Interesting! Another reason to feel comfortable in the decision to not use Mastodon anymore ;) I wonder why they would have that design decisionâŠ
Fediverse appreciation post.
I donât know about the apps youâre using but at no point in the Fediverse have I lost track of a post I was reading because the feed auto-refreshed against my will.
Which happens to me regularly on LinkedIn. (And I remember happened on the other platforms Iâve left.) Which should make you acknowledge â if you havenât done so already â how that is a design feature on the other platforms, not a bug.
@elhult
> One objective could be to generate text that is satisfying to customers. đ€·ââïž
Haha, fair enough. It struck me that they had that sentence because they expected AI to be more specific, my assumption being that this definition came into being before the LLMs did, but I'm not sure.
> I don't think the term AI is very good because it is too broad. The OECD definition has that problem too.
Definitely agree that the term AI is really just confusing, especially since there are so many different definitions going around. The EU AI Act being another example which has lots of words but which really boil down to "something automated by a computer".
> do you have any AI definition that you like?
Not really, for the same reasons. I think we should divide whatever AI covers into at least 2 or 3 different segments. The fact that "AI" is also used so extensively in science fiction really just means that it's destined to give people the wrong idea.
In Moral Codes, Alan Blackwell talks about 2 different kinds of AI:
"The first kind of AI used to be described as âcyberneticsâ, or âcontrol systemsâ when I did my own undergraduate major in that subject. These are automated systems that use sensors to observe or measure the physical world, then control some kind of motor in response to what they observe. [...]"
"The second kind of AI is concerned, not with achieving practical automated tasks in the physical world, but with imitating human behaviour for its own sake. The first kind of AI, while often impressive, is clever engineering, where objective measurements of physical behaviour provides all necessary information about what the system can do, and applying mentalistic terms like âlearningâ and âdecidingâ is poetic but misleading. The second kind of AI is concerned with human subjective experience, rather than the objective world."
This is a good start for understanding why the public discourse can be confusing. Especially when people point to the benefits of type 1 when one is critiquing type 2.
Source: https://moralcodes.pubpub.org/pub/1mn2q39n/release/6
As a kid I spent so many hours on Flight Simulator II (on my Atari 800XL), I finally believed I could cope well if I had to take over the controls of a commercial plane. đ . I mean I had TWO joysticks!
@dcm
I was thinking from a user perspective that a tool like ChatGPT does not have a clear objective. But with the interpretation that the user has some sort of objective then everything does I suppose.
I was struck by how different a general-purpose chatbot is from an AI built for detecting anomalies in x-rays for example, where the objective is very clear. My assumption was then that the definition was once written with specific applications of machine learning in mind.
@elhult
Maybe it's just me but I don't get the impression that ChatGPT has an explicit or implicit objective for example.
Looking at the definition of AI by the Organization for Economic and Co-operation Development (OECD):
"An AI system is a machine-based system that, for explicit or implicit objectives, infers, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments. Different AI systems vary in their levels of autonomy and adaptiveness after deployment."
Based on this, if a language model has no explicit or implicit objectives it is not an AI.
@rrwo đđđž
The fact that you are on floss.social made this response epic.
@timmymac Haha, exactly. Thatâs identifying the real harms!
Imagine a âsmartâ toothbrush. Through a bluetooth-enabled app on your phone, it is programmed to provide personalised feedback on your brushing habits based on time spent, pressure applied and area covered.
Now imagine worrying that adding more and more computing power to the toothbrush will create an all-powerful superbeing that erases mankind.
I get that vivid imaginations can end up there but that they are being taken so seriously, without any more coherent reasoning or explanation than âit feels like itâ, is truly baffling.
@ambivalena Ja, jag hade sjĂ€lv missat den i december sĂ„ det kĂ€ndes plötsligt jĂ€tteviktigt att hjĂ€lpa den att fĂ„ spridning. đ
Jag har skrivit förr om det barnarbete som sker för att hela tiden utveckla digitala apparater, och Àven klara av den gröna omstÀllningen, men jag har inte rest för att bevittna detta pÄ plats.
Det gjorde dÀremot Staffan Lindberg och Magnus Wennman förra Äret, nÀr de reste till Madagaskar för att med egna ögon prata med de undernÀrda barnen som grÀver fram de mineraler som tillverkningen av elbilar krÀver.
Det Ă€r platsen för vĂ€rldens första klimatsvĂ€lt. Andra svĂ€ltkatastrofer i modern tid har utlösts av krig och konflikter. För sex Ă„r sedan, nĂ€r regnet slutade falla över södra Madagaskar, inleddes den första dĂ€r den globala uppÂvĂ€rmningen var huvudorsaken enligt FN.
«Laha och de andra barnen kĂ€nner inte till att mineralen de bryter anvĂ€nds till elbilar. De har knappt sett nĂ„got fossildrivet fordon, bortsett frĂ„n uppÂköparens lastbil och en och annan FN-jeep.
Lahas tankar gĂ„r till förĂ€ndÂringen som orsakade svĂ€lten.
Fingrarna knÀcker en liten bit glimmer.
â Om vi bara hade tillrĂ€ckligt med mat som förr skulle vi orka grĂ€va merâŠÂ»
Reportaget frÄn december Àr för mig en sammanfattning av samtiden. Hur drivet att bygga nytt ska rÀdda oss frÄn problemen som uppstÄtt ur besattheten vid att bygga nytt. Hur de som drabbas hÄrdast av problemen drabbas ytterligare. Hur osynliga, och osynliggjorda, de som drabbas Àr för de som gynnas. Att varumÀrken knappt pÄverkas av omstÀndigheterna. Att konsumtionen som lösning vinner om och om igen. Tills den inte gör det.
Vad betyder det att skriva pÄ en barnkonvention?
https://special.aftonbladet.se/story/jleydo
@bigbro It's a closed session, which I also think is key to valuable and open conversations. But I definitely want to share more of takeaways and learnings on my blog later.
@julian Thank you for sharing. This is my experience as well... at least a year of sorting things out.
One of my takeaways is that online platforms will have lots of settings for memorializing accounts or deleting them completely. But they arenât going to teach you how to download your content and make it available to your family in a sensible way.
It will actually be an open discussion as part of the session, what are designers' responsibilities. I'm also thinking of books, music, playlists that are likely to get lostâŠ
People have of course been talking about these things for a long time but I don't see any clear answers.
Designers at least carry much of the weight of consent, information and communication. My reflection is that this can generally be done in a much better and more proactive way. And assume responsibility and talking about it more openly is a step forward.
@JackEric The thought did cross my mind earlier but I kind of dropped it as I kept working on the presentation... but now that you mention it it actually makes sense to bring this up towards the end... things will go wrong and we will need to evaluate them.
Doing a session tomorrow on Postmortem Design - actually designing to protect the legacy of users after they pass away.
I'm prepping my slides and I'm already crying. So much data getting lost and so hard for families to access it.
I'm using my grandma's attic as a backdrop. I used to love heading up there and discovering old photos, letters, stamps, coins and memorabilia each with its own story.
Now who owns everyone's attic⊠do our digital legacies matter and if so, who should own it and access itâŠ