There's really no value in AI content nor is it smart. All it's doing is pulling already existing content people have already written and then spinning and filling it. We used to call these article spinners back in the early 2000's and google slapped them hard. I don't see why google wouldn't slap the heck out of AI content as it's very predictable in how it writes.
It's not smart, it's not creating anything new it's just compiling already written content.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Hmm, everyone here seems to say that for some reason although this isn't true. Yes, AI is trained on already written text to learn how to use the language. But if you use data priming to fill the AI with information you are doing research on or just fill it with your own data it will produce 100% original content. You can do that with ChatGPT too.
What I'm trying to say is that this is completely false if you don't just tell the AI "hey write about this and that" and everyone seems to be unaware of this being a possibility.
Generative AIs are getting easier to train and sooner rather than later everybody will be able to easily train one with their own personal touch and every AI will be unique. At that point, these discussions won't really matter.
YEs. I think you have to use it to see that, and use it with intelligence and figuring out how it works. I'm not sure many people are doing that - they are quickly labelling it as an enemy, or a drawcard to whip up something in two seconds to gain rewards of some kind. Used intelligently, it's an entirely different story.
Also, here, you've literally said 'hey I used it' - that's perfect! Now I can choose whether to vote or not. Only reason I'm not is that my VP is too low!
For some reason, most people complain about zero-effort posts that are generated by AI. I don't get that because they are so easy to spot and are rarely interesting to read through. If big curators are responsible with their votes they should be able to spot that and decide to avoid voting on it or downvote an overreawarded post like that.
But let's say that someone makes a post with GPT saying "write me a post about legendary tennis players", and that post garners a shit ton of engagement with the person publishing post. Is that value? Should that be upvoted and encouraged?
Interesting question. I still don't think it should be rewarded, but that could be black and white of me. Yet that's not a bad thing either. Doesn't that mean people are going to chuck out a lot of AI posts on the blind hope people will engage and reward? If this kind of value is end game, why isn't a little sentence at the end saying 'This was co written with ChatGPT' or 'This was written by CHAT GPT in response to the prompt x' a good idea? If people really believed in the AI they'd do this but for most part they are doing it just for the rewards.
Interestingly I find when they do that they aren't sourcing their images either, AI gen or not.
I don't think that's the case because people generally don't like spammers and those just looking to extract value won't bother doing that manual part where you need to actually talk to other human beings (I think), haha.
But sure, having a disclaimer might be the best way to go in terms of transparency but in my opinion, if I enjoyed the content and/or learned something from it, and/or engaged with it. I don't see why that disclaimer would even matter, right?
Nah, I wanna know. There's enough lies and deception on the internet as it is.
That's cool, but those that will use it maliciously won't tell you anyway.
Agreed, AI content has little or no value and is not smart. It's interesting the persistent mentality of the people pushing AI, use it or "die" (become non-existent).
Convenience causes an atrophy of ability. These people will become addicted and helpless without their AI tools. Do they think that the corporations who own this technology will forever allow free access? Just take a look at what happened to social media.
Further to this, governments are also moving to curtail this free and easy access to AI, because they are scared of what the public will do with it. The EU has already passed a raft of laws.
So the AI community, enjoy it while it lasts.