locallynonlinear

joined 1 year ago
[–] locallynonlinear@awful.systems 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (7 children)

Ha! Nope, not buying it.

nasty license Ironic, considering that their work directly builds upon Stable Diffusion.

Funny you mention licenses, since stable diffusion and leading AI models were built on labor exploitation. When this issue is finally settled by law, history will not look back well on you.

So I’m not allowed to have the discussion I’m currently having

Doesn't seem to prevent you from doing it anyways. Does any license slow you down? Nope.

nor to include it in any Linux distro

Not sure that's true, but also unnecessary. Artists don't care about this or need it to be. I think it's a disengenous argument, made in the astronaut suit you wear on the high horse drawn from work you stole from other people.

This is not only an admission of failure but a roadmap for anybody who wants to work around Nightshade.

Sounds like an admission of success given that you have to step out of the shadows to tell artists on mastodon not to use it because, ahem, license issues?????????

No. Listen. The point is to alter the economics, to make training on image from the internet actively dangerous. It doesn't even take much. A small amount of internet data actively poisoned requires future models to use alignment to bypass it, increasing the marginal (thin) costs of training and cheating people out of their work.

Shame on you dude.

If you want to hurt the capitalists, consider exfiltrating weights directly, as was done with LLaMa, to ruin their moats.

Good luck on competing in the arms race to use other people's stuff.

@self@awful.systems can we ban the grifter?

 

Remember how we were told that genAI learns "just like humans", and how the law can't say about fair use, and I guess now all art is owned by big tech companies?

Well, of course it's not true. Exploiting a few of the ways in which genAI --is not-- like human learners, artists can filter their digital art in such a way that if a genAI tool consumes it, it actively reduces the quality of the model, undoing generalization and bleading into neighboring concepts.

Can an AI tool be used to undo this obfuscation? Yes. At scale, however, doing so requires increasing compute costs more and more. This also looks like an improvable method, not a dead end -- adversarial input design is a growing field of machine learning with more and more techniques becoming highly available. Imagine this as sort of "cryptography for semantics" in the sense that it presents asymetrical work on AI consumers (while leaving the human eye much less effected).

Now we just need labor laws to catch up.

Wouldn't it be funny if not only does generative AI not lead to a boring dystopia, but the proliferation and expansion of this and similar techniques to protect human meaning eventually put a lot of grifters out of business?

We must have faith in the dark times. Share this with your artist friends far and wide!

[–] locallynonlinear@awful.systems 4 points 10 months ago

Feel free to ask Michael in the comments of his blog, he frequently replies, helpfully, with references. I mean all science is tentative, so skepticism is healthy.

[–] locallynonlinear@awful.systems 12 points 10 months ago

Scientists terrified to discover that language, the thing they trained into an highly flexible matrix of nearly arbitrary numbers, ends up can exist in multiple forms, including forms unintended by the matrix!

What happens next, the kids lie to their parents so they can go out partying after dark? The fall of humanity!

[–] locallynonlinear@awful.systems 4 points 10 months ago

Also seems relevant

Like in the deer, the large-scale target morphology can be revised – the pattern memory re-written – by transient physiological experience. The genetics sets the hardware with a default pattern outcome, but like any good cognitive system, it has a re-writable memory that learns from experience.

[–] locallynonlinear@awful.systems 9 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I wonder if Scott is the person who stood up during Michael Levin's talk on (non genetic) bio-electric circuits storing morphological memory across time and said, “those animals can’t exist!”

Just like neuroscientists try to read out and decode the memories inside a living brain, we can now read and write (a little bit…) the anatomical goals and memories of the collective intelligence of morphogenesis. The first time I presented this at a conference – genetically wild-type worms with a drastically different, rewritten, permanent, target morphology – someone stood up and said that this was impossible and “those animals can’t exist”. Here’s a video taken by Junji Morokuma, of them hanging out.

[–] locallynonlinear@awful.systems 16 points 10 months ago

you forgot the last stage of the evolution,

you'll later find out that people were talking about you, your actions, your words, and that being ghosted was in fact the consequence of your actions, and then you'll have one last opportunity to turn it all around

  1. do some self introspection and reconcile what actually happened vs what you intended to happen, and decide that it is in fact possible to create relationships without trying to meta discomfort them for your purposes specifically

or

  1. wokeism is the reason, so this time you need to be even MORE obnoxious, to filter people out who would talk behind your back even strongester! (repeat from the top of your flow)
[–] locallynonlinear@awful.systems 1 points 10 months ago

I think there is a nugget of truth here in so far as that you can't live life trying to make everyone happy, but also, you get what you shop for so, have fun with the shit heads.

[–] locallynonlinear@awful.systems 4 points 10 months ago

I love DnD and TTRPGs. I even love watching some streams when the quality is high. But I'm with you slides in pocket protector I don't generally like this new wave of people who bring the expectation to my tables that every scene and every situation is a massive mellow drama mary sue projection for their OC that must be maximized.

What was that about wit and brevity? Simple done well?

[–] locallynonlinear@awful.systems 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Always my favorite part of your day.

[–] locallynonlinear@awful.systems 9 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Why protest when you could spend far less energy and just "not be wrong" and "have no stake" by over-fitting your statistical model to the past?

[–] locallynonlinear@awful.systems 2 points 10 months ago

"priors updated" was the same desired outcome all along.

[–] locallynonlinear@awful.systems 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

If I could sum up everything that's wrong with EA, it'd be,

"We can use statistics to do better than emotions!" in reality means "We are dysregulated and we aren't going to do anything about it!!!!"

view more: next ›