FaceDeer

You’re in a community called “Technology” and it’s got a bunch of upvotes, so us, presumably.

Alright, so swap in some different words if you don’t like those. The basic point is the same - there’s a bunch of models from different sources that can solve this, it’s not just some weird one-off fluke.

Your own argument is a bit all over the place too, by the way. You said this puzzle “wasn’t tricky in the slightest” and yet that “it requires understanding what is being asked.” So only 71.5% of humans can accomplish this “not tricky in the slightest” problem, but there are some AI models that are able to “understand what is being asked”? Is “understanding” things not “tricky”?

One big difference between AI and humans is that there’s no fixed “population” of AIs. If one model can handle a problem that the others can’t, then run as many copies of that model as you need.

It doesn’t matter how many models can’t accomplish this. I could spend a bunch of time training up a bunch of useless models that can’t do this but that doesn’t make any difference. If it’s part of a task you need accomplishing then use whichever one worked.

It’s nice in that it gives the various Discord competitors a longer period to work on getting their software spiffed up.

Yes. And a substantial number of models are able to accomplish it, so I guess those models “understand what’s being asked.” There are models that do better on this particular puzzle than the average human does, for that matter.

Yeah, I’m not bothered by the actual clicking of “I accept the GPL”, it’s more the misunderstanding of it that the existence of the click-through represents. If someone’s licencing their code I would hope they’d spend a bit of time researching how the license they’re using actually works.

It’s tricky in the sense that it requires abstract reasoning.

You went digging through my Reddit comments to find a two-month-old thread, that must have taken a lot of effort. But I’m afraid I don’t see what the relevance of it is, aside from a general “it’s about AI”. The bulk of the comments I wrote there were about water usage.

I’m genuinely puzzled. Are you saying that deduplicating data is “hiding unethical behaviour?” It’s actually intended for improving the model’s performance, having a model spit out exact copies of its training data means you’ve produced a hugely expensive and wasteful re-implementation of copy-and-paste rather than a generative AI. The whole point of generative AI is to produce novel outputs.

Thanks. This has actually been a thing that bothered me many years before AI was ever a thing, there are open source programs I’ve installed that pop open a clickwrap “agree with the GPL before you can install this” step and it shows a misunderstanding of how these licenses fundamentally work. They’re not EULAs.

As for whether I’m a “concern troll”, AI happens to be an area of significant interest to me right now and so I’ve been commenting a lot on it. My opinion on it also happens to be unpopular. I don’t like the idea of closed social media bubbles where only groupthink is allowed, so I just go ahead and speak my mind even knowing it’ll likely get hit with a lot of downvotes. I’m finding the Fediverse to be a lot more insular than Reddit is in this regard, I suspect because the population in general is a lot smaller, but at least downvotes don’t tend to “bury” comments.

If anyone can’t stand reading my comments, I recommend blocking me. It’s the ultimate downvote.

This could backfire on them, I recall several years back reading a study in which anti-abortion sentiment plummeted the moment subjects were asked whether the pregnant woman herself should be punished (not even executed, just punished) for getting an abortion.

It’s an interesting bit of cognitive dissonance, the sentiment seemed to be “yeah, abortion is murder, the doctor’s a murderer, but the person who hired him to do that murder is an innocent victim who must be protected.”

In fact, I prefer the use of local AIs and dislike how the field is being dominated by big companies like Google or OpenAI. Unfortunately personal preferences don’t change reality.

Did I say anything incorrect?

That generally only happens in cases of overfitting, where the model was trained on a poorly de-duplicated data set that contains many copies of that book (or excerpts, quotes, and so forth). This is considered a flaw by AI trainers and a lot of work goes into sanitizing the training data to prevent it.

It may be that such a license can’t exist. The way these viral copyleft licenses work is that they offer things to people who accept them that copyright otherwise doesn’t permit. The usual example: you can distribute copies of this work (a thing that copyright prohibits you from doing by default) but in exchange you must release any derivative works you make under the same licence.

The problem is that you actually can reject that licence. You can download the software (that’s allowed because the person distributing the software agreed to the copyleft license) and then decide you’re not going to accept the license that came with it. At that point you’re restricted by ordinary copyright and can only do the things you’d normally do with it.

There have already been court cases in the US that have ruled that training an AI is fair use, and the resulting model is not a derivative work covered by the copyright of the original. So you can just go ahead and train the AI at that point.

I’m not doing it on behalf of anyone. Should we ignore the technology because we don’t like the specific people who are developing it?

And yet the best models outdid humans at this “car wash test.” Humans got it right only 71.5% of the time.

Yeah, “AI is getting pretty good” is a very unpopular opinion in these parts. Popularity doesn’t change the results though.

And that score is matched by GPT-5. Humans are running out of “tricky” puzzles to retreat to.

Are you aware that there’s more to the court system than juries? And that those juries, too, operate under a strict set of rules about what they can and can’t rule on?

If you’re not investing anything in anything then this really isn’t your problem.