imagine that all these various biomes are feeding social ecologies in service to a different type of superstructure. The current superstructure we call neoliberalism or capitalist modernity, that thinking of it in a in a mycelial way, how do we create resilient bio, regional, sovereign communities that are not divided by artificial state lines,

mix the artificial cells with the living cells the living cells die

prosthetic leg um you have a very difficult time walking because obviously you're not getting any smata Sensation from the leg so we just just put in pressure and angle sensors o sorry we put in pressure and angle sensors and then the person can feel uh what the leg is doing and um an

the notes you make about it as you curate it (which tells the AI exactly what you find useful about it)

the model collapse paper now suggests that the training data created by well-managed communities could be the new currency of collective intelligence.

“after greed and short-sightedness floods the commons with low-grade AI content… well-managed online communities of actual human beings [may be] the only place able to provide the sort of data tomorrow’s LLMs will need”

Google AI Overviews is the main culprit and poses an existential threat to publishers.

One employee suggested that Adobe should come up with "a long-term communication and marketing plan outside of blog posts," and meet with the company's most prominent critics on YouTube and social media to "correct the misinformation head-on.""Watching the misinformation spread on social media like wildfire is really disheartening," this person wrote in Slack. "Still, a loud 'F Adobe' and 'Cancel Adobe' rhetoric is happening within the independent creator community that needs to be addressed."A third worker said the internal communication review process might be broken. "What are we doing meaningfully to prevent this or is this only acted on when called out?" the person wrote.

It's unclear how this information is accessed, and whether the creators of the data can opt out or get paid.

Adobe upset many artists and designers recently by implying it would use their content to train AI models. The company had to quell those concerns with a blog post denying this.But some Adobe employees are still not happy with the response, and they are calling for improved communication with customers.According to screenshots of an internal Slack channel, obtained by Business Insider, Adobe employees complained about the company's poor response to the controversy and demanded a better long-term communication plan. They pointed out that Adobe got embroiled in similar controversies in the past, adding the internal review process needed to be fixed. This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. Have an account? Log in. "If our goal is truly to prioritize our users' best interests (which, to be honest, I sometimes question), it's astonishing how poor our communication can be," one of the people wrote in Slack. "The general perception is: Adobe is an evil company that will do whatever it takes to F its users.""Let's avoid becoming like IBM, which seems to be surviving primarily due to its entrenched market position and legacy systems," this Adobe employee added.

Fake it, I scream at myself inside my head. You must remember how.Let's get this over with or you'll be here all night. Bestir yourself. Move yourflesh around, breathe audibly. It's the least you can do

For all audiences and in most content, use intelligent or intelligence to describe or talk about the benefits of AI.In UI, use intelligent technology to describe the underlying technology that powers AI features.

criminals could easily create a package that uses a name produced by common AI services and cram it full of malware

the average percentage of hallucinated packages is at least 5.2% for commercial models and 21.7% for open-source models, including a staggering 205,474 unique examples of hallucinated package names, further underscoring the severity and pervasiveness of this threat

Boden’s conception of creativity as “exploration and play”

Phil Agre

y arms around him.It's only a job, he said, trying to soothe me.

Many of the Wives havesuch gardens, it's something for them to order and maintain and care for

Enhancing AI for Gender Equality through the Multistakeholder Approach

Freedom of Expression and Challenges Posed by Artificial Intelligence

AI for Good3, SDG AI LAB4, IRCAI5 y Global Partnership for Artificial Intelligence6

we are slower we are irrational we are imperfect we are drifting away we are forgetting stuff we are making mistakes but we are learning from our failures we get support from our from our friends from our from our colleagues and we are understanding and instead of just analyzing the world and this is giving us the ultimate cognitive Edge

human beings don't do that we understand that the chair is not a specifically shaped object but something you consider and once you understood that concept that principle you see chairs everywhere you can create completely new chairs

the brain is Islam Islam is it is lousy and it is selfish and still it is working yeah look around you working brains wherever you look and the reason for this is that we totally think differently than any kind of digital and computer system you know of and many Engineers from the AI field haven't figured out that massive difference that massive difference yet

this blue ball with three stumps a chair or this strange design object here because you can sit on it and what you see here is the difference the main difference between the computer world and the brainworld

Please sign these letters to legislators, telling them that misguided AI laws will hurt startups and small companies and discourage AI innovation and investment in California.AI offers tremendous benefits, but many fear AI and worry about potential harm and misuse. These are valid concerns for everyone, including legislators, but laws that promote safe and equitable AI should be fact-based, straightforward, and universally applied. Legislators in Sacramento are considering two proposals, AB 2930 and SB 1047, that would impose costly and unpredictable burdens on AI developers, including anticipating and preventing future harmful uses of AI. Though well-intended, these bills will dampen and inhibit innovation, permanently embed today’s AI leaders as innovation gatekeepers, and drive investment and talent to other states and countries.

In this respect, we join Fitzpatrick (2011) in exploring “the extent to which the means of media production and distribution are undergoing a process of radical democratization in the Web 2.0 era, and a desire to test the limits of that democratization”

Many low-calorie sweeteners are sugar alcohols that also are produced endogenously, albeit at levels over 1000-fold lower than observed following consumption as a sugar substitute.

Our rivers and lakes are crying out for help as they grapple with pollution, illegal construction and climate crisis.

Experts agree that 2024 will be the year AI invades and transforms work as we know it

Meanwhile, Amazon and other ebook retails are pushing full-steam ahead to promote AI-generated content at the expense of real authors and artists. Publisher who actually pay authors and artists and editors now have to compete with AI-generated material churned out in bulk and sold at 99 cents. And while it is easy to shrug this off if you are outside the industry and claim, "Well, the cream rises to the top," anyone that has been around the industry long enough knows that what rises to the top is what Amazon's algorithms push there. And the AI bots are much better at manipulating the algorithms that real people.

Have you ever had a meaningful conversation with Siri or Alexa or Cortana? Of course not.

rtificial intelligence is already everywhere

We’re over a year into the AI gold rush now, and corporations using top AI services report unremarkable gains, AI salesmen have been asked to rein in their promises for fear of underdelivering on them, an anti-generative AI cultural backlash is growing, the first high-profile piece of AI-centered consumer hardware crashed and burned in its big debut, and a bombshell scientific paper recently cast serious doubt on AI developers’ ability to continue to dramatically improve their models’ performance. On top of all that, the industry says that it can no longer accurately measure how good those models even are. We just have to take the companies at their word when they inform us that they’ve “improved capabilities” of their systems.

"The problem is that even the best AI software can only take a poor-quality image so far, and such programs tend to over sharpen certain lines, resulting in strange artifacts," Foley said. Foley suggested that Netflix should have "at the very least" clarified that images had been altered "to avoid this kind of backlash," noting that "any kind of manipulation of photos in a documentary is controversial because the whole point is to present things as they were." Hollywood's increasing use of AI has indeed been controversial, with screenwriters' unions opposing AI tools as "plagiarism machines" and artists stirring recent backlash over the "experimental" use of AI art in a horror film. Even using AI for a movie poster, as Civil War did, is enough to generate controversy, the Hollywood Reporter reported.

despite Rus’s assurances, people do fear that robots and AI will steal their jobs, or at best demote them to underlings. To counter this dystopian idea, Rus contends that technology usually creates jobs: between 1980 and 2015, for example, computers eliminated 3.5 million jobs but generated 19 million new ones. Perhaps so, but were these good jobs? Quality should count as much as quantity. And for every inspiring new application of robotics in the book, Rus includes another idea that made me cringe. On one page, she describes a smart glove that could help an elderly stroke victim regain the use of her hands and write a birthday card to a grandchild. Wonderful. Then she talks about adapting the glove for children, to take control of their hands when learning to write and circumvent the hard work of mastering this skill. Dreadful. In spite of her warnings about the need to properly train robots and AI systems, she seemingly forgets that human muscles and nerves need training as well, and that failing and flailing are integral parts of learning. Short-circuiting that process has a cost. Such lessons apply to adults, too. As much as I’d love to turn all yard work over to feral Roombas and never rake leaves or shovel snow again, such chores do instill discipline and pride. They’re also forms of physical activity, something most of us need more of. Indeed, it would be one thing if people offloaded tedious chores to robots and spent their free time hiking mountains or running marathons—but lying on the couch eating potato chips seems likelier. We’ve all seen the human blobs of Wall-E.

it follows that no purchasable articlecan supply our individual wants so far as a key to our stockof information is concerned. We shall always be mainly de-pendent in this direction upon our own efforts to meet ourown situation.

We can't use algorithms to filter for quality because they're not designed to. They're designed to steer you towards whatever's most profitable for their creators.That puts the onus on us, as users, to filter out the noise and that is increasingly difficult.

So AI could be a tool to help move people into expression, to move past creative blocks

"The Curse of Recursion: Training on Generated Data Makes Models Forget," a recent paper, goes beyond the ick factor of AI that is fed on botshit and delves into the mathematical consequences of AI coprophagia: https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.17493 Co-author Ross Anderson summarizes the finding neatly: "using model-generated content in training causes irreversible defects": https://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2023/06/06/will-gpt-models-choke-on-their-own-exhaust/ Which is all to say: even if you accept the mystical proposition that more training data "solves" the AI problems that constitute total unsuitability for high-value applications that justify the trillions in valuation analysts are touting, that training data is going to be ever more elusive.

Botshit can be produced at a scale and velocity that beggars the imagination. Consider that Amazon has had to cap the number of self-published "books" an author can submit to a mere three books per day: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/sep/20/amazon-restricts-authors-from-self-publishing-more-than-three-books-a-day-after-ai-concerns

For people inflating the current AI hype bubble, this idea that making the AI "more powerful" will correct its defects is key. Whenever an AI "hallucinates" in a way that seems to disqualify it from the high-value applications that justify the torrent of investment in the field, boosters say, "Sure, the AI isn't good enough…yet. But once we shovel an order of magnitude more training data into the hopper, we'll solve that, because (as everyone knows) making the computer 'more powerful' solves the AI problem"

As the lawyers say, this "cites facts not in evidence." But let's stipulate that it's true for a moment. If all we need to make the AI better is more training data, is that something we can count on? Consider the problem of "botshit," Andre Spicer and co's very useful coinage describing "inaccurate or fabricated content" shat out at scale by AIs: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4678265 "Botshit" was coined last December, but the internet is already drowning in it. Desperate people, confronted with an economy modeled on a high-speed game of musical chairs in which the opportunities for a decent livelihood grow ever scarcer, are being scammed into generating mountains of botshit in the hopes of securing the elusive "passive income": https://pluralistic.net/2024/01/15/passive-income-brainworms/#four-hour-work-week

Cómo las distintas maneras de investigación creación, entre las que se encuentran la investigación diseñística, artística, IAP, entre otras, informa y dialoga con la propia investigación doctoral y sus epistemologías.

This episode's transcript was produced by an AI. If you notice any errors, please get in touch.

Despite the opportunities of AI-based technologies for teaching and learning, they have also ethical issues.

The experiences of the atomic scientists clearly show the need to takepersonal responsibility, the danger that things will move too fast, andthe way in which a process can take on a life of its own. We can, as theydid, create insurmountable problems in almost no time flat. We mustdo more thinking up front if we are not to be similarly surprised andshocked by the consequences of our inventions.

The GNR technologies do not divide clearly into commercial andmilitary uses; given their potential in the market, it’s hard to imaginepursuing them only in national laboratories. With their widespreadcommercial pursuit, enforcing relinquishment will require a verificationregime similar to that for biological weapons, but on an unprecedentedscale. This, inevitably, will raise tensions between our individual pri-vacy and desire for proprietary information, and the need for verifica-tion to protect us all. We will undoubtedly encounter strong resistanceto this loss of privacy and freedom of action.

Now, as then, we are creators of new technologies and stars of theimagined future, driven—this time by great financial rewards andglobal competition—despite the clear dangers, hardly evaluating whatit may be like to try to live in a world that is the realistic outcome ofwhat we are creating and imagining.

How soon could such an intelligent robot be built? The coming ad-vances in computing power seem to make it possible by 2030.

in hishistory of such ideas, Darwin Among the Machines, George Dysonwarns: “In the game of life and evolution there are three players at thetable: human beings, nature, and machines. I am firmly on the side ofnature. But nature, I suspect, is on the side of the machines.”

Uncontrolledself-replication in these newer technologies runs a much greater risk: arisk of substantial damage in the physical world.

Moravec’s view is that the robots will eventually suc-ceed us—that humans clearly face extinction.

Our overuse of antibiotics has led to what may be thebiggest such problem so far: the emergence of antibiotic-resistant andmuch more dangerous bacteria. Similar things happened when attemptsto eliminate malarial mosquitoes using DDT caused them to acquireDDT resistance; malarial parasites likewise acquired multi-drug-resistant genes.

Matt GrossMatt Gross (He/Him) • 1st (He/Him) • 1st Vice President, Digital Initiatives at Archetype MediaVice President, Digital Initiatives at Archetype Media 4d • 4d • So, here's an interesting project I launched two weeks ago: The HistoryNet Podcast, a mostly automated transformation of HistoryNet's archive of 25,000+ stories into an AI-driven daily podcast, powered by Instaread and Zapier. The voices are pretty good! The stories are better than pretty good! The implications are... maybe terrifying? Curious to hear what you think. Listen at https://lnkd.in/emUTduyC or, as they always say, "wherever you get your podcasts."

there's this broader issue of of being able to get inside other people's heads as we're driving down the road all the time we're looking at other 00:48:05 people and because we have very advanced theories of mind

in my view the biggest the most dangerous phenomenon on the human on our planet is uh human stupidity it's not artificial intelligence

The AI-powered article summarizer

I use expiration dates and refrigerators to make a point about #AI and over-reliance, and @dajb uses ducks. #nailingit @weareopencoop

whether or not it was appropriate to write notes in library books (OK according to Bard, nope for ChatGPT and Claude).