simpson17866

[simpson17866]

Both.

Both is good :)

the whump fan’s dilemma

[simpson17866]

I absolutely love how the backlash against ai art has led to character creators being more accepted. Like yes, not everyone can draw or wants to but they should still be able to participate in the process of character design. And yes an artist did make that character creator and therefore should be supported.

[simpson17866]

Whenever I think about students using AI, I think about an essay I did in high school. Now see, we were reading The Grapes of Wrath, and I just couldn't do it. I got 25 pages in and my brain refused to read any more. I hated it. And its not like I hate the classics, I loved English class and I loved reading. I had even enjoyed Of Mice and Men, which I had read for fun. For some reason though, I absolutely could NOT read The Grapes of Wrath.

And it turned out I also couldn't watch the movie. I fell asleep in class both days we were watching it.

This, of course, meant I had to cheat on my essay.

And I got an A.

The essay was to compare the book and the movie and discuss the changes and how that affected the story.

Well it turned out Sparknotes had an entire section devoted to comparing and contrasting the book and the movie. Using that, and flipping to pages mentioned in Sparknotes to read sections of the book, I was able to bullshit an A paper.

But see the thing is, that this kind of 'cheating' still takes skills, you still learn things.

I had to know how to find the information I needed, I needed to be able to comprehend what sparknotes was saying and the analysis they did, I needed to know how to USE the information I read there to write an essay, I needed to know how to make sure none of it was marked as plagerized. I had to form an opinion on the sparknotes analysis so I could express my own opinions in the essay.

Was it cheating? Yeah, I didn't read the book or watch the movie. I used Sparknotes. It was a lot less work than if I had read the book and watched the movie and done it all myself.

The thing is though, I still had to use my fucking brain. Being able to bullshit an essay like that is a skill in and of itself that is useful. I exercised important skills, and even if it wasnt the intended way I still learned.

ChatGTP and other AI do not give that experience to people, people have to do nothing and gain nothing from it.

Using AI is absolutely different from other ways students have cheated in the past, and I stand by my opinion that its making students dumber, more helpless, and less capable.

However you feel about higher education, I think its undeniable that students using chatgtp is to their detriment. And by extension a detriment to anyone they work with or anyone who has to rely on them for something.

[simpson17866]

One thing I hate and am scared of is the future of writing.

I went on wattpad for shitty fanfic and I immediately could tell one was ai. ON FUCKING WATTPAD. Went on ao3 and that happened there too.

Like ai can be a tool but if you use it for everything what the fuck is the point of feeling joy?

[simpson17866]

People keep talking about how AI images all look the same anyways and stuff, but I think honestly we need to talk about how these days it is super difficult now to do that and how scary that is...

We also really need to talk about how it's not bad that we, as humans who are viewing any art even if it's AI garbage, end up sometimes having feelings provoked by it, and that we shouldn't deny that. Because despite the scariness and the grossness that one feels when realizing something they liked was AI generated, feeling deceived and violated, we should really recognize the validity of whatever feelings were evoked in ourselves. The relationship with it is still valid, even if the means by which it was produced was not. You can look at a painting made on a canvas that was stolen and see both beauty in the painting and hold disgust at the canvas for being taken...

At the same time, while current AI art theft is absolutely fucking despicable, I do think that trying to explain why this is problematic as being because of copyright violation is also not in the best interest of artists. As an artist myself, I think that we need to be very suspect of both those who are taking art and poetry and whatever else and feeding it into data sets while also being really careful to not slip into defending the sorts of copyright laws that don't make room for things like using art as references, making fan art, and that sort of thing.

The tool of generative AI itself I don't think is really inherently bad, either. There are ways to use it that aren't as ecologically destructive or as disgustingly capitalistic in how its trained. Having something that's good at prediction of text isn't bad, it's just a series of algorithms. It's the way that it's being applied, and how that takes advantages of artists like me that makes it so so terrible. If it was more accessible to people like me, not as confusing to use and not as power hungry to train, I do think it could be really useful for even myself in some cases.

[simpson17866]

Five asexuals are playing cards.

One starts to explain the rules: 

I’d say no cheating, but there are already five aces at the table.

[simpson17866]

I don’t make the rules of anarchy, I just follow them ;)

I assure you: somebody, somewhere, is on the exact same wavelength as you are.

[simpson17866]

I remember a couple of years back, someone on the She-Ra subreddit asked "Does anybody know any good fanfictions where [X happens]?"

I asked "Can I offer mine?" and posted a link, and the OP answered "You can, but why did it have to be the only one I've already read?"

I F---ING DIED :D

I assure you: somebody, somewhere, is on the exact same wavelength as you are.

[simpson17866]

Another of my favorite analogies is “No one eats a raw egg and says ‘this cake is nasty’” :)

Just deleted 2000 words because I hated every single one of them.

Had to rewrite it all, and it turned out great.

This is your friendly reminder that first drafts can be messy, horribly written and so cringy that you want to burn your laptop, but that doesn't mean they're worthless.

After all, a phoenix first needs to burn to emerge from its ashes.

[simpson17866]

Such a cool interview, it blew my mind a little bit 😂 Really inspiring to hear someone brimming over with creativity and imagination and excitement in their use of generative AI.

"If you're somebody who wakes up in the morning and has ideas, these things (language models) are made for you...

Ideas are going to become incredibly valuable. I believe that. Because the hardest thing l've found in all my years of working with these models is thinking of new things to ask them to do.

And we need creatives for that.

I don't want to live in a world defined by people whose idea of success is saving money and lowering headcounts. I don't want to live in an efficiency world.

I want to live in an exploration world.

And I want other people to be exploring with me - because after a while, it gets lonely being the only wagon....

F*** around and find out is the business model of generative Al."

- Jenny Nicholson, Beyond the Prompt: Creatives should stop being afraid of Al.

I realise that for some creators, the thing that stops them from interacting with Al isn't fear but rather concerns about the ethics, the environment, consent, loss of fandom community spirit etc.

I think those concerns are totally valid but it seems like some of the concerns will become less and less of an issue as generative Al changes, e.g with Small Language Models (see my post on that here).

Personally, I LOVE creating - fanfic, fanvids, gif sets, mood boards, podfics - and Al fuels my creativity too. To quote Captain Picard in the very last line of the last TNG episode - "So, five-card stud, nothing wild... and the sky's the limit."

[simpson17866]

If the ethical issues are resolved, then “2 human beta readers and 1 AI beta reader” wouldn’t be different from “3 human beta readers” in the sense that whatever feedback you get, you’re ultimately deciding for yourself whether to do something with it or not.

I haven’t tried this myself yet because I don’t have a project yet to try this with, but just looking at the theory behind this as a mathematician:

No matter how high-quality your human betas, and no matter how low-quality your AI beta, having 2 high-quality betas and a low-quality beta will give you more decision-making material to work with than just 2 high-quality betas by themselves.

(And actually, now that I think about it, I would imagine that even if the low-quality beta — in this case, an AI — gives advice that’s obviously bad, explaining to yourself what MAKES the bad advice bad could accidentally trick you into giving yourself better advice. Like flipping a coin to make an important decision: If you’re disappointed by the decision the coin-toss committed you to, then you know you don’t want to do it, and you can comfortably do the other thing instead)

We ask your questions anonymously so you don’t have to! Submissions are open on the 1st and 15th of the month.

[simpson17866]

[simpson17866]

“Capitalism creates freedom and innovation”

[simpson17866]

[simpson17866]

[simpson17866]

"I want to explain to tech-bros on the internet that ChatGPT is 1,000,000 times more complicated than the autofill on my phone, but that it’s not fundamentally different, and that asking ChatGPT questions about how to solve real-life problems is like asking my phone’s autofill to solve them. How can I convince these tech-bros that it’s a bad idea?”

“I don’t know how to explain it but I know that I can do it better than you can and I can tell you that I can do better than you better than you know that I can do with the best of my own hands”

"I asked Grok.""I asked Chat gpt." ok, well, i asked Sam winchester, and he said,"So get this...

[simpson17866]