is it not relatively trivial to pre-vet content before they train it? at least with aigen text it should be.
Kind of like how true thoughts and opinions on complex topics are boiled down to digestible concepts for others to understand who then perpetuate those concepts without understanding them and the meaning degrades and we dont think anymore, just repeat stuff in social media comments.
Side note... this article sucks and seems like it was ai generated. Repetitive and no author credit? Just says it was originally posted elsewhere.
Generative AI isnt in danger of being killed as this clickbait titled suggests... just hindered.
Anyone who has made copies of videotapes knows what happens to the quality of each successive copy. You're not making a "treasure trove." You're making trash.
Good riddance.
Having now flooded the internet with bad AI content not surprisingly its now eating itself. Numerous projects that aren't AI are suffering too as the quality of text reduces.
"Model collapse" is just a fancy way of saying "our stupid ideas are bad and nobody wants them."
No no. I think the LLMs. Or language models. Actually start to turn into mush “mentally” or how ever you phrase it.
Deep fired AI art sucks and is a decade late to the party
I was very interested in the thumbnail of this post so I did a little digging and found this: The PDF to the Paper where the whole picture is
Wow, it's amazing that just 3.3% of the training set coming from the same model can already start to mess it up.
It's like a human centipede where only the first person is a human and everyone else is an AI. It's all shit, but it gets a bit worse every step.
Good
No it doesn't.
All this doomer stuff is contradicted by how fast the models are improving.
Oh no . .
Anyway
remember how nfts feel off (due to how they lost their value) have a theory that ais will come to the same fate cause they cannot train (it according to the article?)
Sooner or later it is supposed to happen, but I don't think we are quite there....Yet.
Lol
If we can work out which data conduits are patrolled more often by AI than by humans, we could intentionally flood those channels with AI content, and push Model Collapse along further. Get AI authors to not only vet for "true human content", but also pay licensing fees for the use of that content. And then, hopefully, give the fuck up on their whole endeavor.
One thought that I've been imagining for the past while about all this is .... is it Model Collapse? ... or are we just falling behind?
As AI is becoming it's own thing (whatever it is) ... it is evolving exponentially. It doesn't mean it is good or bad or that it is becoming better or worse ... it is just evolving, and only evolving at this point in time. Just because we think it is 'collapsing' or falling apart from our perspective, we have to wonder if it is actually falling apart or is it progressing to something new and very different. That new level it is moving towards might not be anything we recognize or can understand. Maybe it would be below our level of conscious organic intelligence ... or it might be higher .. or it might be some other kind of intelligence that we can't understand with our biological brains.
We've let loose these AI technologies and now they are progressing faster than what we could achieve if we wrote all the code ... so what it is developing into will more than likely be something we won't be able to understand or even comprehend.
It doesn't mean it will be good for us ... or even bad for us ... it might not even involve us.
The worry is that we don't know what will happen or what it will develop into.
What I do worry about is our own fallibilities ... our global community has a very small group of ultra wealthy billionaires and they direct the world according to how much more money they can make or how much they are set to lose ... they are guided by finances rather than ethics, morals or even common sense. They will kill, degrade, enhance, direct or narrow AI development according to their share holders and their profits.
I think of it like a small family group of teenaged parents and their friends who just gave birth to a very hyper intelligent baby. None of the teenagers know how to raise a baby like this. All the teenagers want to do is buy fancy cars, party, build big houses and buy nice clothes. The baby is basically being raised to think like them but the baby will be more capable than any of them once it comes of age and is capable of doing things on their own.
The worry is in not knowing what will happen in the future.
We are terrible parents and we just gave birth to a genius .... and we don't know what that genius will become or what they'll do.
If it doesn't offer value to us, we are unlikely to nurture it. Thus, it will not survive.
Your thought process seems to be based on the assumtion that current AI is (or can be) more than a tool. But no, it's not.
That is not how it works. That's not how it works at all.
The idea of evolution is that the parts kept are the ones that are helpful or relevant, or proliferate the abilities of the subject over generations and weed out the bits that don't. Since Generative AI can't weed out anything (it has no ability to logic or reason, and it does not think, and only "grows" when humans feed it data), it can't be evolving as you describe it. Evolution assumes that the thing that is evolving will be a better version than what it evolved from.
Technology
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.