ff 138 added 'profiles'. What is the difference between the new profiles system and the old profile manager ones? It looks like the new profiles live inside a traditional profile.

What's the point of two separate profile systems anyway?

irl shower thought

While there are legit use of gen AI in various automation or more so in advanced text processing, apart from these in real world these are useless gimmick at best. Nobody wants to read AI novels (at least in current SOTA).

The perfect demand market for LLMs is ad business and marketing. Surely marketing strategists won't be replaced, but illustration, copy writing (for low interaction rate ads especially, like car ads. Very few people will buy the car with respect to how many see them), emotion analysis, marketing communication to consumers and spam botting; all will become much cheaper with gen AI.

Nowadays nobody with a thinking mind trusts ads, those are already filled with lies and deceptions. A hallucinating model won't be much of a trouble. Moreover less people will do mindless these mindless jobs and contribute to something more meaningful.

Fellow lemmings do you agree?

I do agree it is not a dilemma to everyone. Still many believe that blocking ads harms creators supported by them. It is true for google adsense based platforms like youtube (youtube premium requires account, hence privacy implication).

Instead any content anyone watches can be rewatched with ads enabled.

In case a platform trust not logged in views less (as it might be on youtube, I am not sure) the privacy risk can be mitigated by having a -big enough) network of logged in account to 'view' the contents ad enabled.

What do you think?

First and foremost, this is not about AI/ML research, only about usage in generating content that you would potentially consume.

I personally won't mind automated content if/when that reach current human generated content quality. Some of them probably even achievable not in very distant future, such as narrating audiobook (though it is nowhere near human quality right now). Or partially automating music/graphics (using gen AI) which we kind of accepted now. We don't complain about low effort minimal or AI generated thumbnail or stock photo, we usually do not care about artistic value of these either. But I'm highly skeptical that something of creative or insightful nature could be produced anytime soon and we have already developed good filter of slops in our brain just by dwelling on the 'net.

So what do you guys think?

Edit: Originally I made this question thinking only about quality aspect, but many responses do consider the ethical side as well. Cool :).

We had the derivative work model of many to one intellectual works (such as a DJ playing a collection of musics by other artists) that had a practical credit and compensation mechanism. With gen AI trained on unethically (and often illegally) sourced data we don't know what produce what and there's no practical way to credit or compensate the original authors.

So maybe reframe the question by saying if it is used non commercially or via some fair use mechanism, would you still reject content regardless of quality because it is AI generated? Or where is the boundary for that?