this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
1215 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

66687 readers
5042 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] chaosCruiser@futurology.today 13 points 4 days ago (16 children)

How many pages has a human author read and written before they can produce something worth publishing? I’m pretty sure that’s not even a million pages. Why does an AI require a gazillion pages to learn, but the quality is still unimpressive? I think there’s something fundamentally wrong with the way we teach these models.

[–] mimavox@lemm.ee 0 points 4 days ago (11 children)

The more important question is: Why can a human absorb a ton of material in their learning without anyone crying about them "stealing"? Why shouldn't the same go for AI? What's the difference? I really don't understand the common mindset here. Is it because a trained AI is used for profit?

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (5 children)

It is because a human artist is usually inspired and uses knowledge to create new art and AI is just a mediocre mimic. A human artist doesn't accidentally put six fingers on people on a regular basis. If they put fewer fingers it is intentional.

[–] mimavox@lemm.ee 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That's where I don't agree. I don't subscribe to the view that LLMs merely are "stochastic parrots".

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

What do you think they are if not that?

They don't have emotions, they don't have individual motivations, and don't have intent.

[–] mimavox@lemm.ee 0 points 3 days ago

No. But I do think they mimick the language capacity in the human brain.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)