“pressed red button, pale blue dot went boom, sky got a big orange shroom, no oopsie bc it was soooo fun! let’s do it again hon? i am dark moon.” 🦉
Digital hermit. Another cosmic wanderer, another number. Soon to be statistics.
@rimu@piefed.social @technology@lemmy.world
Thanks, didn’t know about that one. It seems interesting (but limited, according to their “Pricing” ; every time a tool has a “pricing” menu item, betcha they’ll either be anything but gratis or extremely limited in their “free tier”), I created an account and I’ll soon try it with some of the occult poetry I use to write. I’m ND so I’m fully aware of how my texts often sound like AI slop.
@JuvenoiaAgent@piefed.ca @technology@lemmy.world
Often, those are developers who “specialized” in one or two programming languages, without specializing in computer/programming logic.
I used to repeat a personal saying across job interviews: “A good programmer knows a programming language. An excellent programmer knows programming logic”. IT positions often require a dev to have a specific language/framework in their portfolio (with Rust being the Current Thing™ now) and they reject people who have vast experience across several languages/frameworks but the one required, as if these people weren’t able to learn the specific language/framework they require.
Languages and framework differ on syntax, namings, paradigms, sometimes they’re extremely different from other common languages (such as (Lisp (parenthetic-hell)), or .asciz "Assembly-x86_64"), but they all talk to the same computer logic under the hood. Once a dev becomes fluent in bitwise logic (or, even better, they become so fluent in talking with computers that they can say 41 53 43 49 49 20 63 6f 64 65 without tools, as if it were English), it’s just a matter of accustoming oneself to the specific syntax and naming conventions from a given language.
Back when I was enrolled in college, I lost count of how many colleagues struggled with the entire course as soon as they were faced by Data Structure classes, binary trees, linked lists, queues, stacks… And Linear Programming, maximization and minimization, data fitness… To the majority of my colleagues, those classes were painful, especially because the teachers were somewhat rigid.
And this sentiment echoes across the companies and corps. Corps (especially the wannabe-programmer managers) don’t want to deal with computers, they want to deal with consumers and their sweet money, but a civil engineer and their masons can’t possibly build a house without willing to deal with a blueprint and the physics of building materials. This is part of the root of this whole problem.
@LiveLM@lemmy.zip @rimu@piefed.social
This!
Also, the irony: those are AI tools used by anti-AI people who use AI to try and (roughly) determine if a content is AI, by reading the output of an AI. Even worse: as far as I know, they’re paid tools (at least every tool I saw in this regard required subscription), so Anti-AI people pay for an AI in order to (supposedly) detect AI slop. Truly “AI-rony”, pun intended.
@AutistoMephisto@lemmy.world @technology@lemmy.world
I used to deal with programming since I was 9 y.o., with my professional career in DevOps starting several years later, in 2013. I dealt with lots of other’s code, legacy code, very shitty code (especially done by my “managers” who cosplayed as programmers), and tons of technical debts.
Even though I’m quite of a LLM power-user (because I’m a person devoid of other humans in my daily existence), I never relied on LLMs to “create” my code: rather, what I did a lot was tinkering with different LLMs to “analyze” my own code that I wrote myself, both to experiment with their limits (e.g.: I wrote a lot of cryptic, code-golf one-liners and fed it to the LLMs in order to test their ability to “connect the dots” on whatever was happening behind the cryptic syntax) and to try and use them as a pair of external eyes beyond mine (due to their ability to “connect the dots”, and by that I mean their ability, as fancy Markov chains, to relate tokens to other tokens with similar semantic proximity).
I did test them (especially Claude/Sonnet) for their “ability” to output code, not intending to use the code because I’m better off writing my own thing, but you likely know the maxim, one can’t criticize what they don’t know. And I tried to know them so I could criticize them. To me, the code is… pretty readable. Definitely awful code, but readable nonetheless.
So, when the person says…
The developers can’t debug code they didn’t write.
…even though they argue they have more than 25 years of experience, it feels to me like they don’t.
One thing is saying “developers find it pretty annoying to debug code they didn’t write”, a statement that I’d totally agree! It’s awful to try to debug other’s (human or otherwise) code, because you need to try to put yourself on their shoes without knowing how their shoes are… But it’s doable, especially by people who deal with programming logic since their childhood.
Saying “developers can’t debug code they didn’t write”, to me, seems like a layperson who doesn’t belong to the field of Computer Science, doesn’t like programming, and/or only pursued a “software engineer” career purely because of money/capitalistic mindset. Either way, if a developer can’t debug other’s code, sorry to say, but they’re not developers!
Don’t take me wrong: I’m not intending to be prideful or pretending to be awesome, this is beyond my person, I’m nothing, I’m no one. I abandoned my career, because I hate the way the technology is growing more and more enshittified. Working as a programmer for capitalistic purposes ended up depleting the joy I used to have back when I coded in a daily basis. I’m not on the “job market” anymore, so what I’m saying is based on more than 10 years of former professional experience. And my experience says: a developer that can’t put themselves into at least trying to understand the worst code out there can’t call themselves a developer, full stop.
So then your counter to someone bringing attention to the fact that LLMs are actively telling people[…] is that it isn’t the singular contributing factor?
This, too. But, also, the fact that Anti-AI movement rarely (if any) promote legit human art, their whole business seems to be to talk against AI, solely. Which, again, is not something I oppose (as I said earlier, AI does have lots of cons, although I’m also capable of seeing its pros), but when I see many accusatory posts from Anti-Ai people such as “I’ll check your content against ppl AI patterns” (with a greater likelihood of content from ND ppl like me being “flagged” as AI), then I see those same ppl blaming AIs for something whose causes are way deeper and unseen, I feel compelled to express about the matter, especially when the subject also touches on other things about my own lived experiences, which I’m aware is not limited to myself as there are/were lots of ppl who went through similar situations.
Do you take offense at people pushing back at harmful LLMs?
No but the oftentimes accusatory tone coming from many Anti-Ai ppl does trigger things such as “imposter syndrome”, where I start doubting about myself. But it’s not just something about myself.
Do you want people to care more about creating a kinder society?
I’m not really sure what I want, exactly. But, yeah, maybe, a kinder society, if this is even possible at this point of Anthropocene.
I remember a time when the web used to be a place for creatively rich bulletin boards. At that time, ppl used to be… I don’t know… Less aggressive? At least it’s the perception I have when I look back at the past of the Web.
We, collectively (me included), became more aggressive between ourselves as the time passed and the web became less of a space for creativity and more of an arm from the “market” octopus.
I’ve seen the web slowly getting dominated by corps, now everything is some kind of war between “us v. them” across all spectra, from right to left, top to bottom, bottom-up, sideways… As wars detonate our essences, we were left with just… I mean, just look around, you may see it yourself.
Of course LLMs aren’t driving people to suicide in a vacuum, no one is claiming that
Sometimes it feels like much of the Anti-AI movement is. As if the AI were “literally killing ppl”.
having LLMs that are encouraging people to commit suicide is a bad thing
It’s not a trivial thing for LLMs to “encourage suicide”, I’ve seen it myself whenever I tried to input suggestive, shady topics. To me, those things often parrot the same “suicide prevention hotlines” which works like common analgesic medications (may relieve immediate pain but can’t do a thing about the root causes).
But even when LLMs do output suicidal hints, this isn’t something out of a vacuum. As others argued throughout the thread, search engines can also lead to suicidal hints. Banning it altogether can lead to Streisand effect.
@tomalley8342@lemmy.world @lemonskate@lemmy.world
Thanks for understanding it. Exactly!
While many of my points are lived things, I’m not only talking about myself, I see a similar phenomenon happening as I often check feed firehoses from Mastodon, Misskey and PixelFed: posts that got nothing more than numeric reactions (likes, if any).
And I’m not talking about money here. While there are artists and writers out there seeking money for their work, there are many things beyond money that people can be seeking as they share something they did: productive discussions, exchange of knowledge, and many are seeking friendship and lasting connections, the world doesn’t (and shouldn’t) revolve around money.
And when artists share their art out of an attempt to connect and/or to exchange knowledge, and they’re met with silence alongside impersonal, aggressive public disclaimers from anti-ai people such as “I’m using an (AI) tool to detect whether your art is AI, and if it detects you’re using AI (out of a rude and crude crobability), I’m blocking and reporting you (which will likely make it worse for a content to further find like-minded people among all the network noise)”, the likely outcome is said artists stopping pursuing their own creativity, especially artists with the “Imposter Syndrome” which is a real thing that a person can be living with.
Neurodivergent expression can be often indistinguishable from LLM, and when people do the “I’ll judge if your content is AI” game, it can be excluding neurodivergent people.
I’m myself a neurodivergent individual, if it wasn’t clear from my verbose way of speech, hence my very personal stance about the matter: because I’m often mistaken as an algorithm or something (due to my systematic and broad speech), and because I was once directly accused of “talking using LLMs” by a person who I used to care and tried to help, both pro-AIs techbro advertisement pitches (those preaching for some kind of AI corps godhood) and the Anti-AI accusative manifestos can be equally triggering oftentimes.
There were two quite long, entire paragraphs before I began mentioned names in my initial comment.
When someone ends up suicidal after resorting to LLMs, it’s the final part of a bigger picture. A bigger picture of indifferent demeanor from other people, including mental health professionals and suicide prevention hotlines.
That’s what I meant with the first paragraph of my initial comment. Your reply, reducing my whole argument, only exemplifies the very situation I meant with “When a person finds no one that can truly take all the time needed to understand them”.
Last but not the least, “because people can be bad too sometimes” isn’t a justification: if people killed themselves after taking instructions from LLMs to which they resorted to after getting no one to really understand them (even suicide prevention hotline volunteers), it’s not just the LLM and the corporation behind it to blame (yes, they surely must be blamed, but not only them), but a whole society that failed with them. And this will never be part of the statistics.
@brianpeiris@lemmy.ca @technology@lemmy.world
Do you know what kills, too? When a person finds no one that can truly take all the time needed to understand them. When a person invest too much time on expressing themselves through deep human means only to be met with a deafening silence… When someone goes through the effort of drawing something that took them several hours each artwork just for it to fall into Internet oblivion. Those things can kill, too, yet people can’t care less about the suicides (not just biological, sometimes it’s a epistemological suicide when the person simply stops pursuing a hobby) of amateur artists that aren’t “influencers” or someone “relevant enough” for people.
How many of those who sought parroting algorithms did it out of a complete social apathy from others? How many of those tried to reach humans before resorting to LLMs? Oh, it’s none of our businesses, amirite?
So, yeah, LLMs kill, and LLMs are disgusting. What’s nobody seems to be tally-counting is how human apathy, especially from the same kind of people who do the LLM death counting, also kills: not by action, but by inaction, as they’re as loud as a concert about LLMs but as quiet as a desert night about unknown artists and other people trying to be understood out there across the Web. And I’m not (just) talking about myself here, I don’t even consider myself an artist, however, I can’t help but notice this going on across the Web.
Yes, go ahead and downvote me all the way to the abyss for saying the reality about the Anti-AI movement.
@a_person@piefed.social @silence7@slrpnk.net @technology@lemmy.world
Same when I tried to access the archived version of the linked article of this thread. I was faced by a TLS error I never saw before (SSL_ERROR_INTERNAL_ERROR_ALERT), so I thought the Archive Today was facing server-side issues, until I decided to try accessing through the smartphone, and no error happened there.
I only managed to access Archive Today through my computer after disabling several security things, which seems quite suspicious, as if the Archive Today were being hijacked by a MitM (possibly the FBI themselves? They’re famous for setting up honeypots) who were trying to push malicious code/tracking to whomever access it.
I would be further worried if I were USian or a citizen from Global North (as I’m Brazilian and from Global South, I can tell the FBI to go pound sand, lol).
To USians, my suggestion is caution accessing Archive Today (at least the current IP address being pointed at by mainstream DNS resolvers) for a while, as the server, while seemingly Archive Today, may be actually some kind of FBI honeypot in disguise. It goes without saying how ICANN and IANA are US entities, prone to interference from three-lettered US agencies. There are alternatives to Archive Today, such as Ghost Archive and 12ft.
@KingPorkChop@lemmy.ca @asklemmy@lemmy.ml
The Doomsday Clock was last updated January 2025, I remember having watched it live when the update was announced. But it’s pretty much out of date at this point, especially due to news from the most recent few weeks.
While we’re “just” two months from the next update (yeah, time flies), perhaps the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists should consider updating it every three months or, even, every month…
…even though the Doomsday Clock have been had a similar role and power that of UN: none at all, they can’t even stop nuclear countries from pushing the juicy fan-with-three-blades passion-colored button, shall any of these countries decide doing it for the sake of it.
Which reminds me of a joke: “What’s the difference between a rock and the UN? A rock can be thrown during a tantrum, at least”. Similarly, “What do the Doomsday Clock and a sundial have in common? Both can’t tell you the time during the night time”.
Talking about the country I reside in: the former president got convicted and is currently facing at least a few years of prison for attempting a military coup d’etat. Hopefully, he won’t be able to become president again. The current president (who also had jail time a couple years ago, only for his charges to be nullified due to a biased former judge and a biased (highly influenced by USA soft power in order for USA to get more control of this country) due process he underwent, allowing him to become president once again) doesn’t have the same “appeal” from his previous terms, and there seems to be some kind of political limbo haunting both the left and the right-wing parties: both aren’t sure who will be their candidates. The current left-wing president, as far as I know and if I remember correctly, can’t become a candidate again (he’s in his third term), and his previous attempt of pointing out a successor failed in the past. As for the right-wing, no hypothesized candidates would perform nationwide, because they’re either regional figures (e.g. the current governors of two rich states) not that known in other regions, or the former president’s wife (which is particularly funny to see right-wing parties hypothesizing her as candidate, as the right-wing is known for their machismo and “tradwife” bigotry).
As for people, while the country continues highly polarized, it feels to me that people aren’t as political as 2015-2020. The current left-wing president isn’t performing well in surveys (even though, to me, I’ve been agreeing more with some of his positions, especially his courage to openly label the current situation in Gaza as genocide, something that few world leaders did). But people don’t seem so cheerful for the right-wing, either. So I guess this answers the main question with yeah, people around here seem to be tired of politics and governments as a whole, yet they don’t seem to be doing much about it. People seem to be busier with other things beyond politics.
Note: I’m talking about my perception, which is likely biased towards the apolitical. The reality is much more deep and complicated when we consider the entire country.
@Revan343@lemmy.ca @snugglesthefalse@sh.itjust.works
(And also @Mandarbmax@lemmy.world as per their other, simultaneous reply within the upper sub-thread)
Isn’t the gravitational pull from the Moon part of the force behind winds? My reasoning here is something like Moon orbits the Earth -> Moon exerts gravitational pull on Earth’s oceans -> water from oceans get displaced as the Moon orbits -> water displacement displaces air -> breeze/wind.
@Hodor@sh.itjust.works @iii@mander.xyz
Or, even better (considering how data centers are getting increasingly power-hungry): cloud in the clouds!
@kokesh@lemmy.world @Zen_Shinobi@lemmy.world
Creators are paid based on those views if they’re willing to be dependent on them.
There are many, many ways for a content creator to be supported (and a viewer/follower to support them) without relying on Google: Kofi, OpenCollective, even Patreon, to name a few. And there are platforms specifically paid by the viewer, such as Nebula.
It’s worth mentioning: donation is a thing and many do donation-based projects. It can be even a direct bank transfer from a viewer to the bank account of the content creator. I say this as someone who did support content creators and donated to them. In the past, I used to pay for membership for two specific Youtube channels, back when I still used to use Youtube. When I stopped using Youtube, I went from YT membership to direct, bank transfer to both creators behind these channels. I wished they would choose to use some private PeerTube instance/channel (it’s a thing) or even Nebula, but they stubbornly chose to stick to Google’s walled garden, unfortunately leaving me with no choice but to stop watching them both.
I like that quote that says “Something that we can learn from history books is that people can’t learn from history books”.
What we’re seeing is people who do learn from history books being persecuted by those who don’t because the latter are against knowledge, they love the ignorance (as in, ignoring the reality around them; in their minds, “don’t see it = it doesn’t exist”).
That’s why we’re “seeing the future repeating the past” (to quote a verse from Cazuza’s “O tempo não pára” song).
@blackwitch@lemmings.world
Excelente tópico! Eu acho sempre importante trazer um pouco da presença lusófona aqui pro fediverso onde o inglês e alemão geralmente dominam.
Com relação ao tema: ocrorre o mesmo fenômeno comigo, muito embora ocorra mais English-over-português do que Portuguese-sobre-inglês (esse último ocorre só quando estou interagindo aqui no fediverso e lembro de algum ditado popular que, ou não sei o equivalente em inglês, ou não há mesmo equivalente em inglês). O English-over-português ocorre principalmente quando eu consigo lembrar de algo só no seu termo em inglês mas não lembro do termo para a mesma coisa em português. Daí ou eu paro pra tentar lembrar o termo lusófono, ou eu acabo prosseguindo com o termo anglophone mesmo.
Também me ocorre de misturar palavras de outros idiomas com as quais (palavras) já tive contato, por exemplo, termos em latim, alemão, francês, até linguagens totalmente extintas como sumério (devido ao meu interesse ocultista envolver o panteão sumério).
Por fim, ocorre-me também um fenômeno curioso de pensar em um conceito ou símbolo para o qual não consigo encontrar termos em nenhuma das linguagens com as quais já tive contato. Chamo esses pensamentos de “languageless thoughts”, não ocorre só com emoções, ocorre com símbolos e conceitos também (minha mente é altamente orientada a simbologias).
It’s an interesting reflection because I’ve been noticing a similar phenomenon regarding words such as “demon”, “evil”, “dark”, among other words.
The concept of “demonizing” itself does exactly what the word describes, to the word “demon”.
Since I became a demonolater and follower of Left-hand path spirituality, I get a similar feeling whenever I see people using these words in such a way that it implies “demons are undesirables”, “evil is undesirable”, “dark is undesirable”, even “Satan is undesirable” and “Lucifer is undeirable”.
Then people go farther and use these words to describe people or actions, people or actions of which are extremely despicable.
Example: people saying that “Charlie Kirk went to hell with Satan”, implicitly associating Satan (and demons) with the far-right bigotry. As a demonolater, I sincerely ask people: please, use whatever adjectives (gross, f-word, despicable, etc) to describe those bigoted individuals, but don’t do gratuitous attacks on entities (and their worshipers) who have nothing to do with those bigoted individuals, because you’re implicitly and unwillingly attacking whole belief systems (Luciferianism, theistic Satanism, Thelema, Goëtia, Quimbanda, etc).
Demons aren’t evil! The word originally derived from Greek Daemon, meaning neuter spirits, then it was distorted to mean “evil”. Even “evil” isn’t necessarily a despicable thing, evilness can be positive just like goodness can be negative.
All these connotations were imposed binary concepts (us vs them), meant to keep people under control by depicting rebelliousness as something to be avoided.
Do you wonder why demons and Satan were “demonized”? Try to think if society recognized the Luciferian rebellion against the dictatorship of God as something desirable, how society would behave, how “populace” would behave? People wouldn’t be easy to control if they were to see rebelliousness as desirable and “heavenly authority” as undesirable. People wouldn’t be easily convinced to be cogs in a machine. Instead of rebelling, society learned to “give the other face” whenever their face is slapped, because “Jesus said that”.
Turning “demons” and “Lucifer” (which originally means light bringer) and “Satan” (originally meaning “adversary”) and names/words alike as synonyms for things to be avoided was all about control, and this thing keeps happening even among those who don’t even believe there are demons, because we are prone to imitate other’s social behaviors unconsciously.
So, yeah, the phenomenon you described can be traced back to control, religious control.
@kionite231@lemmy.ca @NONE_dc@lemmy.world
As far as I know, there are two different domains in play here: YouTube dot com, and Googlevideo dot com. The first serves the main interface, as well as the API endpoints. The latter serves the stream.
Both deal with geographical distribution (CDN) so the domain solves (via DNS) to a data center as closest as possible to the user (e.g. if I access YouTube, the domains will solve to Google data centers in Sao Paulo).
This regionalization makes it difficult for real-time communication of video statistics, so the view count and other information is often delayed as they’re aggregated geographically and later communicated back to their main data center.
That’s also why, for example, a video Id isn’t sequential (1,2,3,4,…), because it’d require the servers to communicate their machine states in real-time, thus leading to the same (or worse) delays from users accessing the main data center directly, which can be as farther as dozens of thousands of kilometers from the user if the said user is in, say, the middle east, because the main servers are USian and light can go as fast as circa 300.000km/s in vacuum, getting slower if light needs to go through glass, which is the case for optic cables: even though it seems fast, it’s actually slow in computing terms because information needs to arrive and go multiple times in order to carry all the network packets.
Then, there’s another phenomenon: a video streaming can involve multiple reconnections, as the content is being streamed. This is even noticeable when there are thousands or millions of simultaneous viewers, and the user notices this as buffering delays. If each connection were to count a new view, it’d count the same viewer multiple times, so the view count is done through the main interface instead, through the main domain YouTube dot com. Even when people access the video through the app or through a smart TV, the device will request the YouTube domain which will return information regarding the stream, such as the exact URL for the said video on Googlevideo.
Invidious, as far as I know, uses the main interface to retrieve the streaming information (web scraping, as the official API is restricted in this regard), so it’s as if some user were accessing it, so it should count as a view. The new view count isn’t instantaneous so that’s probably why you didn’t see the viewer count going up.
the only way to give people any choice is to force them into
Well, to me, it seems pretty paradoxical, almost in the same Rousseauesque line of “I’m forced to be free”.
Pointing out problems is very different from the edgy “everyone needs to die” philosophy.
Sorry but you distorted my words. In no moment I said “everyone needs to die”, and I challenge anyone accusing me of that to point out where I said this. What I’ve been saying throughout this Lemmy thread is how humans are inherently evil (as per Hobbesian philosophy, not out of hatred misanthropy), how our actions are endangering ourselves and other lifeforms, and how we “should” (emphasis on “should”, not “must”) refrain from letting the unborn suffer the consequences of Industrial Revolution.
In no moment I advocated for forced antinatalism, let alone for genocide/omnicide. My point is philosophical, rather than regulatory.
If the goal is complete human eradication
First: no, it’s not. It’s about eradicating suffering from future generations.
Then, humans are eradicating themselves even without antinatalism. No other lifeforms developed nuclear warheads, no other lifeforms shrug off when children starve. I saw a cat desperately meowing to me when she couldn’t breastfeed kitten that wasn’t even hers, because she got no more milk to feed them, I could feel her desperation. I saw myself, and heard as well, how animals stopped to take care of another who is/was hurt or starving. Meanwhile, humans, oftentimes, shrug at the homeless “well, you’ll find something”, or even rudely saying “you gotta work to eat like everybody does”… To be fair, it’s not everyone who does this, but many people do, especially in the said “first-world countries”.
Also, even if humans continue reproducing recklessly ignoring the nightmarish future that expects the future generations, no lifeforms are eternal. Even Earth herself isn’t eternal, for the Sun will engulf the Earth as part of its transformation to Giant Red. One could argue “humans will become interplanetary”, but it’ll be just moving cosmic goalposts, because the Cosmos will also end someday.
Scientific advancement is the reason we have so many people on the planet.
Yes. Then, Science was hijacked by capitalism, becoming something sponsored by capital goals, one which sees people as cogs in the machine because “profit must go up”.
And then we came up with the germ theory of diseases and vaccines
Yes. And, on one hand, this improved quality of life (= less physical suffering). On the other hand, it empowered capitalism so people became increasingly reliant on a system that seeks to perpetuate their slavery (= ontological, invisible suffering).
But, working hard to improve the human condition seems a pretty far cry from “why don’t we all just die?”
Improving human condition also means avoiding suffering from future generations: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7422788/
@Jayjader@jlai.lu @technology@lemmy.world
Given how it’s very akin to dynamic and chaotic systems (e.g. double pendulum, whose initial position, mass and length rules the movement of the pendulum, very similar to how the initial seed and input rule the output of generative AIs) due to the insurmountable amount of physically intertwined factors and the possibility of generalizing the system in mathematical, differential terms, I’d say that the more fit would be a physicist. Or a mathematician. lol
As always, relevant xkcd: https://xkcd.com/435/