FaceDeer

Username checks out.

Some people are convinced that immortality is terrible. They’ve fallen into the cult of the Dragon-Tyrant, IMO.

We know a few. “Fire”, for example. And “Axe”. The inventions named after them are still in use to this day.

We don’t want machines to do our dishes while we create art!

It’s weird how AI has turned so much of the internet from its generally anti-copyright stance. I’ve seen threads in piracy and datahoarding communities that were riddled with “won’t someone please think of the copyright!” Posts raging about how awful AI was.

I maintain the same view I always have. Copyright is indeed broken, because of how overly restrictive and expansive it has become. Most people long ago lost sight of what it’s actually for.

If they do it’s not by the actual training of AI.

Simple.wikipedia isn’t a summary of regular Wikpedia, it’s a whole separate thing. It’s intended to convey the same data, just in a simpler way.

The problem being discussed here is not the availability of Wikipedia’s data. It’s about the ongoing maintenance and development of that data going forward, in the future. Having a static copy of Wikipedia gathering dust on various peoples’ hard drives isn’t going to help that.

Wikipedia’s traditional self-sustaining model works like this: Volunteers (editors) write and improve articles for free, motivated by idealism and the desire to share knowledge. This high-quality content attracts a massive number of readers from search engines and direct visits. Among those millions of readers, a small percentage are inspired to become new volunteers/editors, replenishing the workforce. This cycle is “virtuous” because each part fuels the next: Great content leads to more readers which leads to more editors which leads to even better content. AI tools (like ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity, etc.) disrupt this cycle by intercepting the user before they reach Wikipedia.

A week or two back there was a post on Reddit where someone was advertising a project they’d put up on GitHub, and when I went to look at it I didn’t find any documentation explaining how it actually worked - just how to install it and run it.

So I gave Gemini the URL of the repository and asked it to generate a “Deep Research” report on how it worked. Got a very extensive and detailed breakdown, including some positives and negatives that weren’t mentioned in the existing readme.

America isn’t the only source of history books.

How would that layer distinguish AI from non-AI?

Oh boy, I bet the comments on this one will be useful.

I like that one, very thorough.

LLMs were trained on our social media feeds, after all…

Toilet paper doesn’t go bad.

I call toilet paper “quality control” now.

Heh, thirding bidet. I’m still working through the stock of toilet paper I bought as a joke when Covid first hit and everyone was panicking about toilet paper, I bought the bidet right after that and realized I’d be taking a looong time getting through that.

It’s handy for lots of other stuff too, if I ever need to quickly rinse something the bathtub’s right next to the toilet so I can hold it there and give it a blast.

Can’t see who downvoted, though. I’ve actually considered switching instances over this since that’s the most important thing to “be serious” with, it’d be nice if people were more judicious with their downvotes and having them be an obvious public thing might make people think twice about that. But the whole upvote/downvote thing in general just seems like a broken concept to me a this point and I don’t care all that much about it.

Depends on the instance, mine is an mbin instance but the upvotes and downvotes are hidden.

I remember coming across a site where you could put in a Fediverse URL and it would tell you who had upvoted and downvoted it, presumably it had an instance in the background that was tracking all that.

Edit: lemvotes.org, linked below by another comment.