Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   clacke (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Monday, 24-Jun-2024 01:24:48 JST clacke

   People are calling output from an inbred generative AI trained on a corpus that accidentally includes AI-generated inputs "Habsburg Art" or "Habsburg AI", and I approve.

   I didn't expect this to be becoming a problem already.

   #HabsburgArt #HabsburgAI
   #GenerativeAI #AI

   • Linux Walt Alt (@lnxw37a2) {3EB165E0-5BB1-45D2-9E7D-93B31821F864} and Blurry Moon like this.
   • Embed this notice
     clacke (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Monday, 24-Jun-2024 05:12:47 JST clacke

     in reply to

     • Delta Wye

     @DeltaWye Among all couples one to five generations back there is *one* that aren't cousins or uncle and niece.

     Say what you want about the Habsburg family tree, it doesn't have this confusing exponential number of people to keep track of like in other family trees as you go back. 😬

   • Embed this notice
     Delta Wye (deltawye@mstdn.social)'s status on Monday, 24-Jun-2024 05:12:49 JST Delta Wye

     in reply to

     @clacke It’s true!

     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_II_of_Spain

     Holy moley that family tree. I heard the genetics there were worse than a fairly close case of incest.

   • Embed this notice
     WikiParty (michaelgraaf@cheeseburger.social)'s status on Tuesday, 25-Jun-2024 06:01:46 JST WikiParty

     in reply to

     @clacke For this very reason, the word "generative" should be replaced with "degenerative" when applied to "A.I."

     Alexandre Oliva and clacke like this.
   • Embed this notice
     clacke (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Tuesday, 25-Jun-2024 06:01:50 JST clacke

     in reply to

     • WikiParty
     @michaelgraaf ooooooh
   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (lxo@gnusocial.net)'s status on Tuesday, 25-Jun-2024 06:39:55 JST Alexandre Oliva

     in reply to
     that problem sounds famliar
     https://www.fsfla.org/blogs/lxo/2023-08-20-stochastic-parrots-vs-intelligence
     clacke likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     GNU Too (gnu2@gnusocial.jp)'s status on Tuesday, 25-Jun-2024 08:27:50 JST GNU Too

     in reply to
     Maybe we'll find that the market value of art is actually pretty low.
     lainy likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     clacke (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Tuesday, 25-Jun-2024 18:19:00 JST clacke

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva

     @lxo It was already a lossy process.

     Now it's a lossy process with a feedback loop.

     Blurry Moon likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Tuesday, 25-Jun-2024 18:36:24 JST sj_zero

     in reply to

     • GNU Too
     If you're ever in a room with a bunch of people, look at their shoes. In spite of shoes being a mass produced item, virtually everyone has different shoes on. Somebody paid a human being to design all those shoes, and even for the cheapest ones the design is constantly changing.
   • Embed this notice
     clacke (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Tuesday, 25-Jun-2024 18:36:26 JST clacke

     in reply to

     • GNU Too
     @gnu2 My unscholarly observation and speculation is that I think what happens in a process like this, where you commodify a product and push the typical price below what a human laborer can live on, and only automated mass-production is possible, is that you lose a huge majority of skilled laborers, but the few that remain are able to charge a premium for their work, for those few rich that want something not mass-produced.
   • Embed this notice
     clacke (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Tuesday, 25-Jun-2024 23:49:47 JST clacke

     in reply to

     • GNU Too
     @gnu2 Bladerunner: "is that a real owl?"
   • Embed this notice
     clacke (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Tuesday, 25-Jun-2024 23:50:01 JST clacke

     in reply to

     • GNU Too
     • sj_zero
     @sj_zero @gnu2 They paid as little as possible, and now they will pay even less to fewer humans, except for those designing thousand-dollar shoes.