• tee9000@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Kind of like how true thoughts and opinions on complex topics are boiled down to digestible concepts for others to understand who then perpetuate those concepts without understanding them and the meaning degrades and we dont think anymore, just repeat stuff in social media comments.

    Side note… this article sucks and seems like it was ai generated. Repetitive and no author credit? Just says it was originally posted elsewhere.

    Generative AI isnt in danger of being killed as this clickbait titled suggests… just hindered.

    • FarFarAway@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Theres a link to the other article, in this article. Says Kristin Houser wrote it…although you may have a point about the rest.

        • General_Effort@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          No. I simply don’t see a plausible scenario for that. The social media comments are quite deplorable. You really have to look for bubbles with educated people. I don’t know why this gets so much traction. Maybe it’s because the copyright industry likes it, or maybe it feeds some psychological need like Intelligent Design.

          • tee9000@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Cant blame me for asking :)

            Seems like tools to recognize ai content to prevent synthetic input avoids model degredation.

            If those tools are up to the task then i would agree it probably doesnt hinder model training. Not sure what the reality is, or if the need for those tools creates a barrier to entry for a significant portion of those trying to create models with internet-crawled data.

            • General_Effort@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              There is no problem with ingesting synthetic data. Well, at least none coming from the fact that it is synthetic. If there was a fundamental difference between the 1s and 0s encoding synthetic data and the 1s and 0s encoding any other data, then you could easily filter it. But there isn’t. The ideas that this community has are magical thinking.

              • tee9000@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                I want to be constructive so:

                Please consider the unintentional disinformation people create when they try to sound like they know what they are talking about. Contributing to discussion is difficult on complex topics.

                Its perfectly natural to want to continue a conversation to the point where you might fill in some details instead of researching a topic or not responding. But this is seriously harmful in the age of disinformation. Theres plenty i dont know. But there are tools expressly created to identify ai content to avoid using it in model training. The consequence of using synthetic data is the only topic in the article you are commenting on. Either read the article or please dont feel like you need to come up with a response.

                • General_Effort@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Yes, I shouldn’t bother replying in these threads. In truth, I’ve already given up on this community but sometimes when I’m bored I can’t help a little peek. Maybe in a few years, some of the smarter ones will wonder why nothing ever came of this. Anyway, be careful with those AI detectors. They don’t work and sooner or later someone is going to get in trouble over that.

    • db2@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      58
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      In case anyone doesn’t get what’s happening, imagine feeding an animal nothing but its own shit.

      • BassTurd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        3 months ago

        Not shit, but isn’t that what brought about mad cow disease? Farmers were feeding cattle brain matter that had infected prions. Idk if it was cows eating cow brains or other animals though.

        • _cnt0@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          3 months ago

          It was the remains of fish which we ground into powder and fed to other fish and sheep, whose remains we ground into powder and fed to other sheep and cows, whose remains we ground to powder and fed to other cows.

      • Stern@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I use the “Sistermother and me are gonna have a baby!” example personally, but I am a awful human so

  • rickdg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    3 months ago

    Old news? Seems to be a subject of several papers for some time now. Synthetic data has been used successfully already for very specific domains.

    • SomeGuy69@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yup, old news and wrong news. Also so many people who hate AI but don’t understand how it works. Pretty disappointing for a technology community.

    • jimmy90@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      or “we’ve hit a limit on what our new toy can do and here’s our excuse why it won’t get any better and AGI will never happen”

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      All such news make me want to live to the time when our world is interesting again. Real AI research, something new instead of the Web we have, something new instead of the governments we have. It’s just that I’m scared of what’s between now and then. Parasites die hard.

    • Snowclone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It’s more ''we are so focused on stealing and eating content, we’re accidently eating the content we or other AI made, which is basically like incest for AI, and they’re all inbred to the point they don’t even know people have more than two thumb shaped fingers anymore."

  • levzzz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    Fake news, just like that one time Nightshade “killed” stable diffusion (literally had no effect) Flux came out not long ago and it’s better than ever

    • Sabata@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      At this point the synthetic data is good enough to intentionally be used for training LLMs.

      • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yeah, just filter out the bad generated images and feed the good ones again, until the model learns how to produce only good ones.

  • draughtcyclist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’ve been assuming this was going to happen since it’s been haphazardly implemented across the web. Are people just now realizing it?

    • FaceDeer@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      No, researchers in the field knew about this potential problem ages ago. It’s easy enough to work around and prevent.

      People who are just on the lookout for the latest “aha, AI bad!” Headline, on the other hand, discover this every couple of months.

    • DeathbringerThoctar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      People are just now acknowledging it. Execs tend to have a disdain for the minutiae. They’re like kids that only want to do the exciting bits. As a result things get fucked because they don’t really understand what they’re doing. As Muskrat would say “move fast and break things.” It’s a terrible mindset.

    • TheHarpyEagle@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Wow, it’s amazing that just 3.3% of the training set coming from the same model can already start to mess it up.

  • aggelalex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    So AI:

    1. Scraped the entire internet without consent
    2. Trained on it
    3. Polluted it with AI generated rubbish
    4. Trained on that rubbish without consent
    5. Are now in need of lobotomy