#learning AI Tools

[jatanshahskill]

Jatan Shah Skill Nation | Power of MS Office

I help professionals and students like you unlock the Power of MS Office by learning AI Tools that help you automate your work & save upto 2 hours daily.

[maodun]

shout out to machine learning tech (and all the human-input adjustment contributors) that's brought about the present developmental stage of machine translation, making the current global village 地球村 moment on rednote小红书 accessible in a way that would not have been possible years ago.

[cyle]

still confused how to make any of these LLMs useful to me.

while my daughter was napping, i downloaded lm studio and got a dozen of the most popular open source LLMs running on my PC, and they work great with very low latency, but i can't come up with anything to do with them but make boring toy scripts to do stupid shit.

as a test, i fed deepseek r1, llama 3.2, and mistral-small a big spreadsheet of data we've been collecting about my newborn daughter (all of this locally, not transmitting anything off my computer, because i don't want anybody with that data except, y'know, doctors) to see how it compared with several real doctors' advice and prognoses. all of the LLMs suggestions were between generically correct and hilariously wrong. alarmingly wrong in some cases, but usually ending with the suggestion to "consult a medical professional" -- yeah, duh. pretty much no better than old school unreliable WebMD.

then i tried doing some prompt engineering to punch up some of my writing, and everything ended up sounding like it was written by an LLM. i don't get why anybody wants this. i can tell that LLM feel, and i think a lot of people can now, given the horrible sales emails i get every day that sound like they were "punched up" by an LLM. it's got a stink to it. maybe we'll all get used to it; i bet most non-tech people have no clue.

i may write a small script to try to tag some of my blogs' posts for me, because i'm really bad at doing so, but i have very little faith in the open source vision LLMs' ability to classify images. it'll probably not work how i hope. that still feels like something you gotta pay for to get good results.

all of this keeps making me think of ffmpeg. a super cool, tiny, useful program that is very extensible and great at performing a certain task: transcoding media. it used to be horribly annoying to transcode media, and then ffmpeg came along and made it all stupidly simple overnight, but nobody noticed. there was no industry bubble around it.

LLMs feel like they're competing for a space that ubiquitous and useful that we'll take for granted today like ffmpeg. they just haven't fully grasped and appreciated that smallness yet. there isn't money to be made here.

[dutchs-blog]

American Dad Ai Genarated

[jaguarsoup]

Work in progress

||DO NOT FEED TO AI DO NOT USE FOR MACHINE LEARNING||

[some-pers0n]

interesting ideas about AI art and by no means am I trying to send hate but I believe majority of people hate AI art is because it's truly just the byproduct of a giant plinko board bouncing through pieces of art made by artists who put love and care and SOUL into their work. A visual product of a math formula. While it's "art" in the most litteral sense, not having a true human behind it putting though and effort into its every detail, for many people (myself included) devalues it from a tradition artists work.

I'm a firm believer in the idea that AI art is inherently unequal to non Ai art, specifically for this reason. (Hope this made sense sorry if it's incoherent)

I agree in that sense there. I personally do not find myself wanting to engage in a work when I purposefully know the creator had used AI to create the entire product. Something something,,,I cannot find myself getting invested in something that is little more than a product. I don't wanna read a fic about my blorbos when it was written by Chat-GPT

I also agree with the idea that a lot of people hate AI art because of this heavily emotional, debatably reactionary mindset that stems from one thing: fairness. It's the same sort of emotion I find one gets if all of the work on a group project gets shafted onto them whilst their fellow peers sit idly by. It feels unfair to sink hours into your craft, spending all this time fighting to develop your skills and flourish as an artist, only to see someone type half a paragraph and have a machine spit back something that looks not half bad. Let's be honest with ourselves here and say that AI art, at least in a visual regard, has progressed quite a bit to the point where most of the mistakes people find can be dismissed as wonky perspective and the line art being a bit fucky, which is something a ton of artists struggle with too

People develop a sort of a superiority complex over it. I can't blame them honestly. A number of times I've felt it too when people tell me they're using Chat-GPT as though it were Google and when I see my family members and friends playing around with AI art. I gotta bite my tongue and choke back a chortle, both because it's kind of a dick move and also because I don't want to relish in this feeling. It's infectious though to feel as though you have an edge over another person just because you abstain from using Chat-GPT or whatever. Not to be all "grrgrgrr you should LOVE Chat-GPT and if you dare to say anything bad then you are EVILL!!" of course though. It's emotions. They're messy, intense, and oftentimes you don't really realize when you're feeling since you get locked into your perspective. Yet, I think it's important to realize a lot of hatred of this generative AI stems from emotions. Reactionary ideals and claims stem from emotions after all

I think ultimately what the conversation about generative AI should revolve around is about the concerns of labour. The several strikes from a while back from VFX artists and scriptwriters come to mind. They are most at stake from generative AI as tools like Chat-GPT are cheaper and more cost-effective than paying an actual employee for their time and effort. I would also mention the environmental issues, but if we were to talk about that we would also have to acknowledge the fact that so, so much water is being used up daily to generate power for servers. Hell, this post alone will probably contribute to drying up some marsh in the greater scheme of things

Anywho yada yada TL;DR: I agree yes but I also think it's important to recognize that a good chunk of your hatred to Chat-GPT stems from feeling cheated and a sense of pride and superiority over others for simply not using it. There is no quality to Chat-GPT that makes it inherently evil. I can't get upset at my grandma for sending me a photo of her and her dog that went through an AI anime filter. I can feel maybe some exhaustion when seeing a fellow classmate using Chat-GPT to write their essay, but ultimately I write my own work for the love of the game. I can get upset however at those in higher power who use it to push artists out of jobs. Chat-GPT is a tool that has its pros and cons and I think it's reductive to just basically sit there and hiss like a vampire when presented with a cross when faced with the mere word "AI", especially when your only big argument for disliking it is based purely in feeling cheated when someone types a prompt into a program and art that would've taken you seven hours to draw gets spit out in about a minute or two

[queen-mabs-revenge]

communist generative ai boosters on this website truly like

[youling-the-ghost]

I've been reading up on NLP, which is basically a type of AI that deals with understanding and generating natural human speech, and I can't help but picturing it as a little autistic kid.

like it has to form an algorithm to understand the underlying intentions of humans' words? it has to deliberately separate speech into smaller chunks and process them individually? it gets confused when words have ambiguous meanings? it struggles with idioms and proverbs? it tends to take things too literally? tell me that's not an autistic child trying to communicate with others.

[songmingisthighs]

dear "creators" who depend on ai

how does it feel to be so absolutely lazy and useless as a human being ?? how does it feel to have a functioning brain but can't use it properly ?? how does it feel to be so absolutely incredibly dull and uncreative that you can't muster 200 words to convey your ideas ?? how does it feel to have to face the fact that you suck so damn bad and you have to live with it ??

[phagein]

i need a pet film bro who regularly gives me esoteric movie suggestions based on every single piece of media i have ever enjoyed

[dutchs-blog]

Tinkerbell AI Genarated

[daemonya]

Useful AI Websites

Remember when we thought robots would take over the world? Well, they kinda did, but instead of laser eyes and metal claws, they're armed with… tools? Yep, these days, AI is less "Terminator" and more "personal assistant on steroids" 🤖

Bot Making Assistant:

Ever wanted a personal minion but can't afford the banana budget?

Fantasy Name Generators

Rabid's Generators and RPG Resources

Random Original Character Generator

Perchance ― AI Character Description Generator

Perchance ― AI Chat & Roleplay and AI Chat w/image

Perchance ― AI Story Generator

Perchance ― AI Text Adventure and AI Adventure w/image

Perchance ― AI Hierarchical World Generator

AI Writing Assistant:

Don't blame me when your AI-assisted love letters start sounding suspiciously like robot poetry.

Cohesive

Dreamily

Fiction Fusion

Grammarly

Hemingway Editor

NovelAI

Perplexity

Phind

Quicktools

RambleFix: AI Note-taking & Writing Tool

RedQuill

TinyWow

ToolBaz

Tune Chat

WriterHand

You

AI Voice Generator:

Want to sound like Morgan Freeman without the years of smoking?

Murf AI

Dupdub AI

Vocal Removal

Adobe: Enhance Speech

Kits.AI (vocal removal, voice cloning)

AI Music Generator:

Who knows, you might accidentally create the next viral TikTok earworm and retire to a private island.

AI VOCALOID

Suno

Udio

AI Image Generator:

Whatever you need, these tools are your ticket to visual madness.

Bing Image Creator (SFW only) 👉🏻 how to prompt

Microsoft Designer (SFW only)

Maze Guru

Tensor.Art

CivitAI

PixAI

Runware

Text to Image

NeuralBlender

Leonardo.AI (and videos too)

Perchance AI Image Generator

Perchance AI Photo Generator (realistic)

AI Video Generator:

Video killed the radio star, and now AI is coming for Hollywood.

Hedra (make your characters sing)

VIGGLE (make your characters dance)

Dreamina (text/image to video)

Luma (text/image to video)

Vidu (text/image to video)

Genmo (text/image to video)

Haiper (text/image to video)

KLING (text/image to video)

Pika (text/image to video)

PixVerse (text/image to video)

invideo (text to video)

Fliki (text to video)

AKOOL (deepfake, face swap, talking photo)

D-ID (make live, speaking portraits)

Runway (prompt to video)

Creatify (create AI video ads)

Adobe: Animate from Audio

AI Image and Video Editor:

These magical tools are here to save your digital bacon!

123apps (edit, convert, create video, audio, PDF)

3D Book Cover Creator (book cover mockups)

Color Picker (from image)

Capcut AI Tools (upscale video)

Upscale.media (upscale image)

removal AI (image background remover)

Photopea (advanced image editor)

[chocolix76]

I feel like Solar Flare and Jack's existence is extremely messed up. In this essay I will.

I want to start off by saying that I absolutely LOVE Solar Flare and Jack and I'm happy they are/were in the show. My problem is the way they were created and why.

Both Lunar and Bloodmoon were originally created to be tools for Eclipse, just as Solar Flare and Jack were created to be tools. The difference is that Lunar and Bloodmoon were created sentient. They both had the ability to recognize that Eclipse was abusing them and were aware of the fact that they were tools. Both of them had the power to actively change their fates, or at least attempt to. Solar Flare didn't have that ability. Jack doesn't have that ability either.

While Solar Flare's existence wasn't at all surprising to me considering what Eclipse did with Lunar and Bloodmoon, it caught me off guard that he wasn't sentient. That's a problem for many reasons considering he wouldn't know he was being mistreated or that he didn't want to serve the purpose he was built for. Yes, he grew more sentient as time went on, but think about it. He was built and then a little while later, Eclipse took over his body and forced Solar Flare back into the headspace where they both later died. Solar Flare never actually got a chance to live.

Jack on the other hand was created to protect Lunar. He no longer has that purpose because he annoyed and angered Lunar when he simply didn't know better. Jack also has the problem where he can't escape his situation and is stuck doing the bidding of others because yet again, he doesn't know better. But what irks me with Jack is the fact that he was created by Solar and was neglected and ignored the same way that Eclipse had done with his creations. In his attempts to please Lunar, Solar left behind his own creation which now no longer has a purpose

[spearxwind]

i think also a huge part of why artists majorly refuse machine-learning (bc that’s what it is, i refuse to call it ai bc it’s inaccurate and gives tech bros too much credit) is that the people currently championing and developing those tools actively want it to replace artists. They loudly and proudly hate the arts and want every creative professional put out of work. They want every creative HOBBYIST to give up. I have seen machine-learning art generators call us artoids (like ‘femoids’ incels or unhealthily online misogynists use to refer to women. To give you the idea of the kind of hate-fueled superiority we’re dealing with) and circle-jerk to the idea of art no longer being a career and no one being able to ask for commissions anymore.

Machine-learning tools are currently a symbol of people who see creativity and art as an enemy, a boogeyman to be slain. They are designed accordingly - stealing human work to create the data, designing it so that people can generate ‘sketches’ or ‘doodles’ to deceive the layman that it was hand-drawn, using real-world likenesses without consent, etc. When tech bros get tired of weaponizing machine-learning because they think we need to get ‘real jobs’ or that furry porn artists charge too much for comms and need to be stopped, it will probably be a lot easier for artists to embrace it as it’ll be a lot easier to develop ethical tools. On top of making development easier, it could become a great tool to make the visual arts accessible for people that have disabilities affecting drawing ability. It could be a wonderful technology.

But as it stands we’re not there yet.

WHATTTT.... ARTOIDS 💀.............................. that is THE most cringe fucking word ever im gonna start calling them fucking inceloids or something

Arent these the people who also have hentai addictions and collect all sorts of images of anime women breasting boobily? Do they think before AI that those images just popped up from the aether? They should also get real jobs that arent living in their moms basements and being a hateful little bitch

It's kind of hilarious that they think machine learning models will be the the end of art though. As if art hasnt been a core human function from prehistoric age and as if it hasnt survived hundreds of purges, demonizations, and attempts to erase certain styles and movements and people. We're going to prevail no matter what and they can die mad about it

[b0rgpup]

The Rise of the AI Anxieties

We are living through a unique cultural moment where the discourse around Artificial Intelligence is becoming increasingly polarized. On one side, there's unbridled optimism; on the other, a deep-seated fear that manifests as everything from legitimate ethical critique to outright hostility towards its users. Concerns about its environmental impact, the centralization of corporate power, privacy, and worker displacement are not just valid; they are critical challenges society must navigate.

However, history is filled with examples of transformative technologies that sparked similar fears. The printing press threatened the scribe's livelihood, the factory threatened the artisan's, and the digital camera was seen by some as the death of "true" photography. Yet, in each case, the technology ultimately created more opportunity, more wealth, and more creative potential than it destroyed. The question, then, is not whether AI has potential downsides, but whether its potential upsides for the vast majority of people outweigh them. This is precisely where the ethical framework of utilitarianism becomes so useful.

A Brief History of the "Greatest Good"

Utilitarianism as a formal school of thought emerged during the 18th and 19th centuries, most famously with the philosophers Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. At its core, it is a form of consequentialism—meaning it judges an action's morality based on its results or consequences.

The guiding principle is simple and profound: the most ethical choice is the one that will produce the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

Crucially, utilitarianism was a progressive and revolutionary philosophy. Its proponents advocated for social reforms like the abolition of slavery, women's suffrage, and the decriminalization of homosexuality because they correctly calculated that these changes would vastly increase the total sum of human well-being and decrease suffering. It is a philosophy of forward momentum, focused on building a better future for all.

The Utilitarian Case for Embracing AI

Applying the principle of utilitarianism to AI, we are ethically compelled to weigh the total potential happiness against the potential suffering. While the risks are real and must be mitigated, the potential benefits are staggering in scale and scope.

AI is poised to revolutionize healthcare, a primary source of global suffering, by amplifying human health and longevity. Its models can drastically accelerate drug discovery and improve diagnostics by detecting diseases from medical scans with superhuman accuracy, making early screening more accessible and effective. From a utilitarian view, contributing to even one major cure would create an incalculable reduction in suffering.

Beyond health, AI provides a new class of tools to address humanity's most complex global challenges.

The massive data centers required to train AI models contribute to global emissions, but this challenge does not negate AI's potential. Instead, it frames the utilitarian objective: to leverage AI to create environmental efficiencies that far outweigh its own energy costs. It can help mitigate climate change by optimizing energy grids for renewables, bolster food security through precision agriculture, and aid disaster relief by analyzing satellite imagery. The goal is to ensure that the combined utility of a more stable climate, a secure food supply, and effective crisis response is a clear net positive for humanity.

Democratizing Access and Opportunity

Furthermore, AI acts as a powerful lever for democratizing opportunity, creativity, and productivity. This democratization is especially profound when considering accessibility, a point often lost in mainstream critiques. Many arguments against AI are framed from a neurotypical and able-bodied perspective, inadvertently dismissing the transformative power these tools represent for millions. For individuals with learning disabilities, AuDHD, or other forms of neurodivergence, AI serves as a vital accessibility tool. It directly supports users by acting as an executive function aid, a text-to-speech reader, or a way to organize and process information into knowledge. In this context, AI isn't a shortcut that undermines "real" work; it's an indispensable support that makes it possible in the first place.

This support extends profoundly to individuals with physical disabilities. For the blind and those with low vision, AI-powered apps can narrate the visual world through a phone’s camera, describing objects, reading text, and even recognizing faces. For the deaf and hard of hearing, AI provides real-time captioning of conversations and can power hearing aids that intelligently isolate voices from background noise. Beyond sensory assistance, AI is revolutionizing mobility. It drives smart prosthetics that learn and adapt to a user's movements for more natural control, and it enables voice-command systems that give individuals with motor impairments control over their digital and physical environments. By leveling the playing field in these fundamental ways, AI allows a vast, often overlooked, segment of the population to participate more fully in education, the workforce, and society.

Just as the camera gave artists a new medium, generative AI offers creative professionals a powerful suite of tools for ideation, experimentation, and production. More profoundly, it gives an independent creator or entrepreneur the capabilities of a small corporation. Repetitive tasks that once required entire departments—from generating marketing copy and social media schedules to creating video storyboards and processing sales leads—can now be automated. This frees up the human creator to focus on high-level strategy, artistic vision, and building client relationships.

For many people struggling to make a living, this newfound efficiency can be the crucial factor that allows them to move from merely surviving to thriving as a small business or independent professional, enabling them to bring more ambitious projects to life and compete on a scale previously unimaginable. For the utilitarian, this empowerment of individuals and reduction of inequality is a massive net good, fostering a more knowledgeable and creative global society.

Conclusion: A Call for Responsible Progress

The utilitarian calculus for AI is clear: the potential for good is immense, but it is not guaranteed. Achieving that greater good requires a collective, conscious effort from all sides of the debate.

To those who detract and resist, consider your own future. AI by itself will not replace you anytime soon. More likely, you risk being displaced by humans who actively and skillfully integrate these tools into their workflows. The pragmatic choice is not to build walls, but to learn the landscape.

To AI’s zealous promoters and the creators of endless, low-effort "slop," the message is simple: slow down. The race to generate quantity over quality erodes the very promise of this technology. True value lies in thoughtful application, not automated noise.

To the companies driving this revolution, please stop rushing terrible, half-baked AI products to market. Each flawed release diminishes public trust, making it harder to realize the profound benefits we've discussed. Meta’s AI products, for example, are all terrible and generally useless. Ethical development and rigorous testing are not obstacles to progress; they are the only way to ensure it is sustainable.

Finally, to those who mock or harass others for using these tools, it's time to consider a broader perspective. What is easily dismissed as a toy or a cheat code is, for many, a vital accessibility tool—a bridge to communication, education, and independence. Such judgment often reveals a profound lack of awareness about the diverse needs that exist in our society. Policing how others achieve their goals helps nobody and often serves only to marginalize those who benefit most from new technology.

The most ethical path forward is not to retreat in fear or to advance with blind zeal. It is to create and move forward with purpose, to actively and thoughtfully steer this powerful new technology toward maximizing the well-being of all humanity.

[tim-official]

thought experiment

imagine there was a generative text bot called AlphaGPT* whose abilities were on par with ChatGPT's. instead of being trained on an enormous dataset comprising all human writings, though, AlphaGPT was trained by giving it a dictionary, an encyclopedia, and hand-crafted rules of grammar, syntax, conversational dynamics, courtesy, ethics, etc.**, all carefully tailored by a team of linguists and philosophers and math people***. no risk of plagiarism, no web scraping. of course, it knows a lot less about the world.

(***no joke, at points in the 60s and 70s, before backpropagation was a thing, this is how most researchers assumed "artificial intelligence" would come about. i doubt this would actually work. but its a thought experiment.) (**what rules of ethics? what conversational dynamics does it prefer? much like with how the company openAI works, let's assume you don't get to know that and you just have to trust them) (*after the program AlphaGo, which learned to play Go at a higher level than any human player in much the same way). reblog for sample size i guess. or dont reblog if you want a lower sample size. thats your prerogative