4mo ago

Dreams come true

40 comments

How many of these books will just be totally garbage nonsense just so they could fulfill a prearranged quota.
Now the LLM are filled with a good amount of nonsense.
- Just use the llm to make the books that the llm then uses, what could go wrong?
  
  Someone's probably already coined the term, but I'm going to call it LLM inbreeding.
  
  It can only go right because corporations must be punished for trying to replace people with machines.
- That would be terrible because they are both some of the best academic publishers in the humanities.

And they expect you to do this for free?
- Do they not have to pay for the privilege? Or is this not referring to academic publishing? (It’s not super clear, but context indicates academic?)
  
  If it is that makes it even worse. Academic publishers need to be abolished.
- Nah, they get “Exposure”!
  /s
- Anyone who reviews for the major publishers is part of the problem.
  
  For profit corporations don't deserve your volunteer work.
  
  And yet if you aren't a reviewer it makes your CV look worse.

Feed the LLM with LLM generated books. No resentment at all!

Jfc that's gross

So what you're saying is, don't beat the targets because fuck those guys. Understood.

What's the academic terminology for "go pound sand"?

Soylent Green is a lie anyway. Your need to "soylentify" half the population to feed the other half every year if it would be the only source of calories.
- No, the point is that they're just recycling the dissidents they were going to murder anyway.

Honestly sometimes I feel like I'm the only one on Lemmy who likes AI
- AI absolutely has its benefits, but it's impossible to deny the ethical dilemma in forcing writers to feed their work to a machine that will end up churning out a half assed version that also likely has some misinformation in it.
  
  And will likely take their professions
  
  Remember! It's not AI hallucinations, it's simply bullshit!
- AI as a technology is fascinating and can be extremely useful, especially in places like the medical field. AI as a product in its current state is nothing more than dystopian plagiarism.
- The company I work for recently rolled up copilot and is have been a mixed bag of reactions, the less savvy user were first blowed up by the demonstration but then got exasperated when it didn't worked as they tough (one of them uploaded an excel file and asked to some analysis it couldn't do, and came to me to complain about it), but for me, and my team had worked great. I've been uploading some of my python and SQL scripts and asking for refactoring and adding comments, or uploading my SQL script and some example I found on stackoverflow and asking for it to apply the example method on my script.
  I say to everyone that if they don't know shit, the AI isn't not going to help a lot, but if you have at least the basic, the AI would help you.
  
  even just on simple stuff I asked it to generate a description on something like
  if x then set z to null
  and it returned
  "this will set z to null if x is true or false"
  like easy to edit, but you have to pay attention.
- I like AI. But I'm not sure I like the way we use it if it's only to meet shareholders' expectations or to be a tool for greedy people. What is your opinion concerning the way we seem to use AI in academic research?
- Found the black and white only guy.

40 comments