_poisonedrationality
_poisonedrationality t1_j8elkeq wrote
The paper you link does not describe YouTube's algorithm. YouTube's selection algorithm is proprietary and not revealed to the public. You just linked a paper from researchers at Google studying the topic of video recommendation. The extent to which it describes youtube's actual algorithm is not at all obvious.
_poisonedrationality t1_j85uxxg wrote
Reply to comment by _sshin_ in [P] Introducing arxivGPT: chrome extension that summarizes arxived research papers using chatGPT by _sshin_
Do you know the difference between ChatGPT and GPT? Are you being misleading on purpose?
_poisonedrationality t1_j7i5r45 wrote
Reply to comment by xtime595 in [N] Getty Images sues AI art generator Stable Diffusion in the US for copyright infringement by Wiskkey
You shouldn't confuse "scientific progress" with "commercial gain". I know a lot of companies in AI blur the line but I think that researchers, who don't seek to make a profit aren't really the same as something like Stability AI, who are trying to sell a product.
Besides, it's not clear to me whether these AI tools be used to benefit humanity as a whole or only increase the control a few companies have over large markets. I really hope this case sets ome decent precedents about how AI developers can use data they did not create.
_poisonedrationality t1_j7e7rz6 wrote
Doesn't sound petty at all to me. Sounds like he's dispelling misconceptions about the progress ChatGPT represents.
_poisonedrationality t1_j6gz4it wrote
Reply to comment by iamsunnycoast in [P] Automating a Youtube Shorts channel with Huggingface Transformers and After Effects by Ch1nada
Really? I see a lot of text to speech channels doing stuff like reading reddit comments. Are you sure youtube demonetizes these because I don't think people would bother without monetization.
_poisonedrationality t1_j60zrrk wrote
Why is this downvoted? Seems like a decent question.
_poisonedrationality t1_j01a9tj wrote
Reply to comment by jsonathan in [P] I made a command-line tool that explains your errors using ChatGPT (link in comments) by jsonathan
I've asked it questions which it has answered incorrectly.
When the answer isn't a basic fact it gets it wrong a decent amount of time.
_poisonedrationality t1_izt0zr3 wrote
Reply to comment by jsonathan in [P] I made a command-line tool that explains your errors using ChatGPT (link in comments) by jsonathan
No
_poisonedrationality t1_izr9ksp wrote
Reply to comment by knowledgebass in [P] I made a command-line tool that explains your errors using ChatGPT (link in comments) by jsonathan
Yes. But I still wouldn't say it's "generally correct" because it makes mistakes far too often.
_poisonedrationality t1_izoejlp wrote
Reply to comment by pisv93 in [P] I made a command-line tool that explains your errors using ChatGPT (link in comments) by jsonathan
Not sure if it works but people have found ways to use ChatGPT through python
_poisonedrationality t1_izoeb0w wrote
Reply to comment by ReginaldIII in [P] I made a command-line tool that explains your errors using ChatGPT (link in comments) by jsonathan
People shitting on exploring AI technology for "environmental impact" are the worst type of griefers.
_poisonedrationality t1_izoe2xm wrote
Reply to comment by jsonathan in [P] I made a command-line tool that explains your errors using ChatGPT (link in comments) by jsonathan
I wouldn't say that. While I'm definitely impressed by its abilities It makes mistakes way too often for me to consider it "generally correct".
It is interesting that even when it makes a mistake it often has some reasonable sounding logic behind it. It makes it feel like it has some level of "understanding".
_poisonedrationality t1_iv0txbb wrote
Reply to comment by World177 in [D] DALL·E to be made available as API, OpenAI to give users full ownership rights to generated images by TiredOldCrow
Does DALL-E let you choose the seed?
_poisonedrationality t1_ja9xdek wrote
Reply to [D] What do you think of this AI ethics professor suggestion to force into law the requirement of a license to use AI like chatGPT since it's "potentially dangerous"? by [deleted]
I hardly ever see AI ethicists say anything useful. I feel like they're motivated by making hot takes than contributing a helpful perspective.