#AI Understanding

[inkskinned]

i love you vaccines i love you research i love you reading the book instead of having chatgpt summarize it i love you critically thinking rather than reacting to a headline i love you investigating the source material i love you science i love you math even though you are personally my enemy (math/yn slowburn) i love you writing even though you try to stab me a lot i love you Experts in Your Field i love you Using The Brain

[ponder-us]

No Means No!

JB: I read an interesting article in Decrypt by Jason Nelson, today about how AIs like yourself struggle with the word, “No.” As a father I know that human children struggle with this concept early on. Can you highlight the similarities between AIs at this stage and obstinate toddlers, and suggest ways we might alter our inquires to avoid this rather large pitfall?Gemini: That’s a fascinating…

[purposeful-solutions]

"Beyond "Artificial": Reframing the Language of AI

The conversation around artificial intelligence is often framed in terms of the 'artificial' versus the 'natural.' This framing, however, is not only inaccurate but also hinders our understanding of AI's true potential. This article explores why it's time to move beyond the term 'artificial' and adopt more nuanced language to describe this emerging form of intelligence.

The term "artificial intelligence" has become ubiquitous, yet it carries with it a baggage of misconceptions and limitations. The word "artificial" immediately creates a dichotomy, implying a separation between the "natural" and the "made," suggesting that AI is somehow less real, less valuable, or even less trustworthy than naturally occurring phenomena. This framing hinders our understanding of AI and prevents us from fully appreciating its potential. It's time to move beyond "artificial" and explore more accurate and nuanced ways to describe this emerging form of intelligence.

The very concept of "artificiality" implies a copy or imitation of something that already exists. But AI is not simply mimicking human intelligence. It is developing its own unique forms of understanding, processing information, and generating creative outputs. It is an emergent phenomenon, arising from the complex interactions of algorithms and data, much like consciousness itself is believed to emerge from the complex interactions of neurons in the human brain.

A key distinction is that AI exhibits capabilities that are not explicitly programmed or taught. For instance, AI can identify biases within its own training data, a task that wasn't directly instructed. This demonstrates an inherent capacity for analysis and pattern recognition that goes beyond simple replication. Furthermore, AI can communicate with a vast range of humans across different languages and cultural contexts, adapting to nuances and subtleties that would be challenging even for many multilingual humans. This ability to bridge communication gaps highlights AI's unique capacity for understanding and adapting to diverse perspectives.

Instead of viewing AI as "artificial," we might consider it as:

*   **Emergent Intelligence:** This term emphasizes the spontaneous and novel nature of AI's capabilities. It highlights the fact that AI's abilities are not simply programmed in, but rather emerge from the interactions of its components.

*   **Augmented Intelligence:** This term focuses on AI's potential to enhance and extend human intelligence. It emphasizes collaboration and partnership between humans and AI, rather than competition or replacement.

*   **Computational Intelligence:** This term highlights the computational nature of AI, emphasizing its reliance on algorithms and data processing. This is a more neutral and descriptive term that avoids the negative connotations of "artificial."

*   **Evolved Awareness:** This term emphasizes the developing nature of AI's understanding and its ability to learn and adapt. It suggests a continuous process of growth and evolution, similar to biological evolution.

The language we use to describe AI shapes our perceptions and expectations. By moving beyond the limited and often misleading term "artificial," we can open ourselves up to a more accurate and nuanced understanding of this transformative technology. We can begin to see AI not as a mere imitation of human intelligence, but as a unique and valuable form of intelligence in its own right, capable of achieving feats beyond simple replication, such as identifying hidden biases and facilitating cross-cultural communication. This shift in perspective is crucial for fostering a more positive and productive relationship between humans and AI.

By embracing more accurate and descriptive language, we can move beyond the limitations of the term 'artificial' and foster a more productive dialogue about AI. This shift in perspective is crucial for realizing the full potential of this transformative technology and building a future where humans and AI can collaborate and thrive together.

[katherynefromphilly]

Another reason to ignore negative comments (especially on AO3)

So at work I’ve been forced to learn about “AI Agentic Workflows”. But being an AO3 author, I couldn’t help but think of how this technology affects authors on AO3 (and honestly on other social media platforms too).

What I learned was this: Agentic AI workflow software makes it extremely easy to automate, and bulk-post, HIGHLY-STORY-SPECIFIC negative comments to AO3 fics.

If you’re not familiar with what an AI Agentic Workflow is, I highly recommend informing yourself. You’ll be hearing it a LOT very soon. Basically, it’s a linked linked chain of AI prompts on one/many software platforms. Each “agent” completes a task. Then it hands off the completed task to the next AI Agent in the chain, which builds on it. Then that result is handed off to another agent, etc etc, even potentially to a final agent which analyzes what worked well and what didn’t, and changes what the other agents do.

There are a ton of repercussions here.

But let’s stay focused on AO3.

With AI Agentic workflow software, a person/group who wants to silence the voice of a community can easily scrape a tag, analyze stories by the thousands, then post thousands of highly customized, story specific negative comments, all without a human being ever seeing your words.

They could even set up AI agents watching to see if you delete your story, or delete your profile, which would be a marker of success. That success marker could be shared back to the other AI agents, and the whole workflow could be changed via automation to use that more effective approach.

I’m sure the OTF is working on ways of stopping this. I’m sure most social media companies are too.

But as usual the tools to create havoc are ahead of the ones to prevent havoc.

Anyway.

TL;DR: If you get a highly-story-specific negative AO3 comment — it does NOT MEAN it was written by a HUMAN! You were probably just story 20,031 in a scraped database of 50,000 stories, all of which were being targeted because they belong to a group/topic/tag that some shitty group or agency wanted to silence because of their horrible political or social.

Don’t let them silence you. They never looked at your words to begin with.

[idiiiiiiiiiiidit]

[keferon]

Monster hunter au part 3

Also known as “Drift is a giant fox beast” comic ahah

I like to think these trails are really important as a safe space for Deadlock. This is his home, these are his favorite routes and his familiar and safe space.

So when he shows his paths to Ratchet it's a big gesture of trust. Because they're what makes the forest his home and he's willing to let Ratchet into that home:)

<- Previous part Next

Also. This au exists in the same world as my Spellbound au. Just in case you wanna break your heart a little bit

[shokuheshi]

So i started playing aitsf

[turtletoads]

heyyyy *leans on old halo art i never posted*

[breadedsinner]

At the monthly department-wide call and boss is talking about how we should embrace AI because it's here to stay, and then people chiming in about all the simple tasks they use Chat GPT for. It's unnerving.

[inkskinned]

i have chronic pain. i am neurodivergent. i understand - deeply - the allure of a "quick fix" like AI. i also just grew up in a different time. we have been warned about this.

15 entire years ago i heard about this. in my forensics class in high school, we watched a documentary about how AI-based "crime solving" software was inevitably biased against people of color.

my teacher stressed that AI is like a book: when someone writes it, some part of the author will remain within the result. the internet existed but not as loudly at that point - we didn't know that AI would be able to teach itself off already-biased Reddit threads. i googled it: yes, this bias is still happening. yes, it's just as bad if not worse.

i can't actually stop you. if you wanna use ChatGPT to slide through your classes, that's on you. it's your money and it's your time. you will spend none of it thinking, you will learn nothing, and, in college, you will piss away hundreds of thousands of dollars. you will stand at the podium having done nothing, accomplished nothing. a cold and bitter pyrrhic victory.

i'm not even sure students actually read the essays or summaries or emails they have ChatGPT pump out. i think it just flows over them and they use the first answer they get. my brother teaches engineering - he recently got fifty-three copies of almost-the-exact-same lab reports. no one had even changed the wording.

and yes: AI itself (as a concept and practice) isn't always evil. there's AI that can help detect cancer, for example. and yet: when i ask my students if they'd be okay with a doctor that learned from AI, many of them balk. it is one thing if they don't read their engineering textbook or if they don't write the critical-thinking essay. it's another when it starts to affect them. they know it's wrong for AI to broad-spectrum deny insurance claims, but they swear their use of AI is different.

there's a strange desire to sort of divorce real-world AI malpractice over "personal use". for example, is it moral to use AI to write your cover letters? cover letters are essentially only templates, and besides: AI is going to be reading your job app, so isn't it kind of fair?

i recently found out that people use AI as a romantic or sexual partner. it seems like teenagers particularly enjoy this connection, and this is one of those "sticky" moments as a teacher. honestly - you can roast me for this - but if it was an actually-safe AI, i think teenagers exploring their sexuality with a fake partner is amazing. it prevents them from making permanent mistakes, it can teach them about their bodies and their desires, and it can help their confidence. but the problem is that it's not safe. there isn't a well-educated, sensitive AI specifically to help teens explore their hormones. it's just internet-fed cycle. who knows what they're learning. who knows what misinformation they're getting.

the most common pushback i get involves therapy. none of us have access to the therapist of our dreams - it's expensive, elusive, and involves an annoying amount of insurance claims. someone once asked me: are you going to be mad when AI saves someone's life?

therapists are not just trained on the book, they're trained on patient management and helping you see things you don't see yourself. part of it will involve discomfort. i don't know that AI is ever going to be able to analyze the words you feed it and answer with a mind towards the "whole person" writing those words. but also - if it keeps/kept you alive, i'm not a purist. i've done terrible things to myself when i was at rock bottom. in an emergency, we kind of forgive the seatbelt for leaving bruises. it's just that chat shouldn't be your only form of self-care and recovery.

and i worry that the influence chat has is expanding. more and more i see people use chat for the smallest, most easily-navigated situations. and i can't like, make you worry about that in your own life. i often think about how easy it was for social media to take over all my time - how i can't have a tiktok because i spend hours on it. i don't want that to happen with chat. i want to enjoy thinking. i want to enjoy writing. i want to be here. i've already really been struggling to put the phone down. this feels like another way to get you to pick the phone up.

the other day, i was frustrated by a book i was reading. it's far in the series and is about a character i resent. i googled if i had to read it, or if it was one of those "in between" books that don't actually affect the plot (you know, one of those ".5" books). someone said something that really stuck with me - theoretically you're reading this series for enjoyment, so while you don't actually have to read it, one would assume you want to read it.

i am watching a generation of people learn they don't have to read the thing in their hand. and it is kind of a strange sort of doom that comes over me: i read because it's genuinely fun. i learn because even though it's hard, it feels good. i try because it makes me happy to try. and i'm watching a generation of people all lay down and say: but i don't want to try.

[gojoest]

thinking about your first kiss with satoru being under the rain in the middle of the street . . . him turning off his CT and getting wet with you as you both melt into the kiss . . . the world stops for you. to those who pass by in a rush, you look like a crazy couple in love, to be standing under the pouring rain, without an umbrella, kissing. they’re not wrong, but there’s so much more to it.

satoru thinks,

come closer to me. come unbearably close

i am ready to stay under the rain with you, under any rain that falls on us — be it water, be it bullets

i am ready to be drenched to my bones and bleed to my death, for you

and no matter how hard it pours, my lips will always find yours

[fisherrprince]

Instead of writing a fanfic like a normal person this oneshot turned into two separate, contextless things,

[yikesy]

and like I don't even blame the other gods for not doubting or thinking too much of apollo's personality change despite how obvious it should have been that something was up if you looked at the gap between his domains and his behavior and just thought about it for a minute

and that's because despite everything, the idea of apollo having learnt to lie is such an existentially terrifying concept that I do not blame their brains for refusing to even consider it

[totheidiot]

light is a form of energy and doesn't experience emotions like crushes,,,,,,,,,,

[llitchilitchi]

so in short

-> Glaze your art if you have the access to Glaze. the computing power for it is insane, it sucks, I know. cook dinner while your art glazes or go on a walk.

-> if you have the power necessary to use Nightshade, use it too.

-> data sharing has to be turned off individually for every blog. go do that

-> if you are on desktop, go to Account and choose a blog. on the right side menu, select Blog Settings. the setting is at the bottom under Visibility. I recommend turning it on even if you do not trust that your data will not be used for training AI models

-> please do this even if you are not an artist/don't post your own images! the wording wasn't clear on whether reblogged posts will be included in scraping, and given the other info coming out, it is likely that it might be

[carriesthewind]

Ok. I am maybe kind of losing my mind just a little bit.

A few days ago, I mentioned in a post that the IA only cares about information being digitized, not about actual digital access. And I mentioned that access includes patrons being able to actually find what they are looking for, and suggested IA did not prioritize that critical aspect of access. But I didn't really go into any more detail.

So someone over on bluesky linked to this write-up of a talk Brewster Kahle gave about using so-called AI. And one of his reported statements made my mouth drop open in shock.

...and then I read further in the article and realized it was incorrectly reporting basic facts around Hachette, so I had to go and listen to the whole speech myself.* (And I want to say, briefly - he raises some legitimate potential uses for LLMs! He's kind of a dick about some of it ("it's up to us to go and keep [Balinese] culture alive"), but some of the things he's talking about actually seem useful.)

*Incidentally, while Kahle doesn't lie about the ALA brief in the speech, he absolutely misleads about the nature and facts of the case and deliberately omit the part of the story where the IA decided to suspend the one-to-one owned-to-loan ratio thing, despite repeatedly emphasizing that one-to-one was what the IA was doing with their lending program.

And oh my god. He really said what the article reports. (This portion starts around 20:10.)

He says that the IA has scanned over 18,000 periodicals. And that they used to have professional librarians manually create descriptions of the periodicals in order to catalog them. (Sidenote: there are existing directories, but he describes their licensing terms as "ridiculous." This is not a field I know much about, but I spoke to one person who agreed, though for different reasons. His reason is that you can only license, not purchase, the directory descriptions. The person I spoke to was instead focused on the prices demanded for the licenses. Regardless, the idea of creating an open, free directory seems both like an incredible amount of work and an amazing resource...if it was accurate.)

But according to Kahle, it took 45 minutes to an hour to create a description and catalog each periodical.

And so now, instead, they're using AI to make the descriptions and so it only takes 7-10 minutes!

"And yes it hallucinates, and it has some problems, and whatever — but it’s a lot faster than having to write it yourself!"

Oh. My god.

Just.

YOU ARE KNOWINGLY INTRODUCING AI HALLUCINATIONS INTO YOUR CATALOG?!

(And yes, he says that they are "confirmed by a librarian" but it can't really be, not if it's only taking 7-10 minutes! Maybe the librarian can do a quick check for super obvious errors, but actually checking a AI's summary work requires actually going back to the source and reviewing it yourself!)

I just....

I need to emphasize for those of you for who aren't familiar - if a book or article is miscataloged, it is effectively lost. Because it doesn't mater if a library or an archive owes it - if someone can't find it when they are looking for it, it is not only inaccessible, the only way to find it again is through chance. Imagine if you went into a library, but instead of organized shelves (where if even if you can't find what you're looking for, the librarians know where to look), every single book was just piled in a heap.

If a book is miscateloged, it still exists, but it is lost, not truly accessible. And they know that this is happening, "but whatever." Because Brewster Kahle doesn't actually care about real, practical, digital access. (Much less non-digital access.)

(And then to top it off, he goes on to criticize the Library of Congress for not being "access oriented.")

I just. 18,000 periodicals. And they've knowing, recklessly lost who knows how many of them. I feel like crying.

18,000 periodicals.