We were joking about this last week if memory serves, but at least one person out there has started a rough aggregator of different sources of pre-AI internet dumps.

It’s all gotta be in the models by now, but it’s gonna be a cool resource for something, right?

I’m somewhat disappointed by the fair use assessment, since I think calling AI models “transformative” is a bit of a stretch from how that is normally used, but I also see where the judge is coming from. Would the analytics that go into Google’s Ngram word frequency engine be considered infringing? You know, provided we ignore that the fuckers couldn’t be bothered to find a single goddamn copy of the book they wanted to feed into the data shredder.

They’d have a better chance convincing techbros to do a serious literary analysis of the video game.

Adding onto this chain of thought, does anyone else think the talk page’s second top-level comment from non-existent user “habryka” is a bit odd? Especially since after Eigenbra gives it a standard Wikipedian (i.e. unbearably jargon-ridden and a bit pedantic but entirely accurate and reasonable in its substance) reply, new user HandofLixue comes in with:

ABOUT ME You seem to have me confused with Habryka - I did not make any Twitter post about this. Nonetheless, you have reverted MY edits…

Kinda reads like they’re the same person? I mean Habryka is also active further down the thread so this is almost certainly just my tinfoil hat being too tight and cutting off circulation and/or reading this unfold in bits and pieces rather than putting it all together.

So many of those changes are just weird and petty, too. Like, I can’t imagine a good reason to not reference Vitalik Buterin as “Ethereum Founder” rather than just a billionaire. I’m sure that I can level the same critique at some pages that are neutrally trying to meet Wikipedia’s standards, but especially in this context it’s pretty straightforward to see that it’s an attempt to remove important context and accurate information that might make them look bad.

Also, not sure if there’s anything here but the Britannica page for Lixue suggests that there’s no way in hell its hand doesn’t have some serious CoIs.

Ed:

Also shout-out to the talk page where the poster of our top-level sneer fodder defended himself by essentially arguing “I wasn’t canvassing, I just asked if anyone wanted to rid me of this turbulent priest!”

User was created earlier today as well. Two earlier updates from a non-account-holder may be from the same individual. Did a brief dig through the edit logs, but I’m not very practiced in Wikipedia auditing like this so I likely missed things. Their first couple changes were supposedly justified by trying to maintain a neutral POV. By far the larger one was a “culling of excessive references” which includes removing basically all quotes from Cade Metz’ work on Scott S and trimming various others to exclude the bit that says “the AI thing is a bit weird” or “now they mostly tell billionaires it’s okay to be rich”.

I mean it does return a 404 now.

That hatchet job from Trace is continuing to have some legs, I see. Also a reread of it points out some unintentional comedy:

This is the sort of coordination that requires no conspiracy, no backroom dealing—though, as in any group, I’m sure some discussions go on…

Getting referenced in a thread on a different site talking about editing an article about themselves explicitly to make it sound more respectable and decent to be a member of their technofascist singularity cult diaspora. I’m sorry that your blogs aren’t considered reliable sources in their own right and that the “heterodox” thinkers and researchers you extend so much grace to are, in fact, cranks.

That’s what I was going to say. The natural language version actually claims that it leaves the dog behind unattended in every step, even though the following step continues as though it still has the dog and not whichever vegetable it brought back in the previous step.

Either it’s not actually good at natural language processing or some element of the solution isn’t surviving the shift from the river_cross() tool to natural language output. Whatever actual state it’s tracking internally doesn’t track to the output past the headline.

Finally circling back around to this.

Feels like I am not just doing my job but also the work the operator of the service or product I am having to use through chat should have paid professionals to do. And I’m not getting paid for it.

Speaking as someone who has worked extensively in IT support, I think that’s the sales pitch for these chatbots. They don’t want to give users tools and knowledge to solve their own problems - or rather they do but the chatbots aren’t part of that. The chatbots are supposed to replace the people who would interact with the relevant systems on your behalf. And honestly, working with a support person is already a deeply unsatisfying interaction in the vast majority of cases. In even the best case scenario it involves acknowledging that some part of your job has exceeded your ability and you need specialized help, and handling that well is a very rare personality trait. But the massive variety of interconnected systems that we rely on are too complex for this to not be a common occurrence. Even if you did radically open everything from internal bug trackers to licensing systems to communications there wouldn’t be enough time in the day for everyone to learn those systems well enough to perfectly self-solve all their problems, and that lack of systems knowledge would be a massive drain on your operations. But trying to fit in an LLM chatbot is the worst of both worlds, in that your users are both locked away from the tools and knowledge that would let them solve their own issues but still need to learn how to wrangle your intermediary system, and that system doesn’t have the human ability to connect and build a working relationship and get through those issues in a positive way.

I think the idea is to build the fortified cult compound in the Internet. That way your disciples can lock themselves inside and start flagellating wherever they may be in the physical world.

I don’t know if I’d go that far. Like, his role as a spokesperson was to present the administration’s official position and not his personal beliefs. I can believe he did that work for a lot of reasons ranging from purely cynical to strategic to the simple economic “I really need this job” kind of thing. Obviously none of those factors are tied to whether or not he believes what he is saying is true, but I think those are distinct from the active disregard for truth unattached to any kind of specific role or position. Kevin isn’t working as an industry spokesman he’s allegedly a journalist who ostensibly gets paid to write the truth.

Amazing. Can’t wait for the doomers to claim that somehow this has enough intent to classify as murder. I wonder if they’ll end up on one of the weirdly large number of “bad things that happen to people in the national parks” podcasts.

New version of Descartes: imagine that an LLM no less hallucination-prone than unaligned, is feeding it’s output directly into your perceptions…

Non cogitat, ergo non est

How had I missed that the guy who was “intrigued” by crypto in 202X was also the guy who told the chatbot to make him leave his wife? I really need to pay more attention to the byline.

I’m pretty sure I have no more than three followers, actually.

Nope. That would be more immediately concerning but less dumb than the reality.

Alright OpenAI, listen up. I’ve got a whole 250GB hard drive from 2007 full of the Star Wars/Transformers crossover stories I wrote at the time. I promise you it’s AI-free and won’t be available to train competing models. Bidding starts at seven billion dollars. I’ll wait while you call the VCs.

I don’t know, I think by their stated goals they did alright. They took investor money, yes, but they used it to move very quickly and break a lot of things. Now, we should probably have seen ahead of time that this was actually a bad thing and that breaking things is a bad goal, but it was the 2000s and we all thought touchscreen digital watches were pretty neat.