haha no worries I've been there. I would've made the same confident correction if I wasn't aware probably in another scenario

No I'm talking about Hank Green's pair of novels, An Absolutely Remarkable Thing and it's sequel I don't remember the name of. I'm aware of the difference :)

Booker listened to the consultants and knows it was the millions of hardcore scolding fetishists who stayed home and can make the difference.

Oh jeez what? I actually really liked his novels too, which were uh… practically giant flashing anti-ai thematically. I don’t YouTube, and saw he stopped posting about shit on here after getting appropriately shouted down for some kind of exploratory shit… how bad is it?

From Aracelis Girmay's book, Kingdom Animalia: bookshop.org/a/862/9781934414620

#poem #booksky #writing

As for the legal side, certainly I am focused on and paying attention to the arguments that will hopefully produce just outcomes for writers and artists and journalists, etc. And if current IP law is somehow ruled to not cover this, then I would of course support a more just rule of law that would.

And the ways in which they function as such are exhaustively documented on the technical and social level.

The ethical side is much more straightforward. Millions and millions of writers, artists, photographers, etc. are telling you they've had their life's work stolen, that they do not consent to that theft, that these are plagiarism machines.

It's a contested question how courts will rule on it, certainly. I think Chhabria's ruling, the memorization papers, Germany's full direct "it's infringement" ruling, and basic common sense re: intellectual property are all strong supporters of it violating IP law! But that's just the legal side.

You (not that guy) obviously are aware of them. You clearly think critically about all this stuff. And I think, as such, you framing a piece like this that actively encourages and promotes that theft and plagiarism as "centrist" in terms of AI dialogue deserves pushback.

If I'm going to listen to what someone has to say about this stuff, understanding whether they A) are unaware of the nature of the models/ethical issues or B) are aware but don't care about artists/writers/human culture, or C) some other framing they might provide, is important!

It's not just some intellectual thought exercise, that's the problem is people treating it that way. It's actually happening. There is a factual, not just subjective opinion, basis to the ethical and legal issues there.

I am justifiably angry at people participating in and encouraging the theft of my and millions of my colleagues and fellow humans' life's work. Acting like it's some great burden to be asked about that is absurd.

Sure. This is really bizarre, man.

Framing using current LLMs (that didn't exist a few years ago) as like "eating a hamburger" is super facetious, and frankly very much part of a kind of big tech inevitability propaganda.

But here I was engaging with you and your framing of this as somehow "centrist".

Sure! And asking such a person how they reconcile the whole theft/ethics part seems important?

Particularly, people who refuse to even acknowledge that nature. By all means, say "I don't give a shit about the ethics/legality"—but that's an important part of whether your argument is worth paying attention to!

I think that's a real circular logic though. I've found it quite persuasive at times with people who hadn't thought about it much or were unaware of the scope and nature of the theft!

And I think arguments that ignore the mass IP theft and various other legal and ethical concerns entirely are only persuasive to people without ethics :)

A chatbot, obviously not. Altman and everyone who designed the chatbot though...

Or like, it is "centrist" in the way that political centrists also are just kind of holding water for the worst people/things :)

As always... I think framing all the supposedly great things you can do with the plagiarism machine without mentioning the plagiarism/theft part once is inherently not a "centrist" take!

(Yes, even the vibe coding you so love, still part of that theft!)

So... I read through it. How are you reconciling encouraging people to use it at all/there being a "right" way to use it, when it's a product of the theft of pretty much all academics (and millions of other writers' and artists') work?

From Aracelis Girmay's book, Kingdom Animalia: bookshop.org/a/862/9781934414620

#poem #booksky #writing

It's because the Liz Cheney strategy worked so well and now she's president

Do it! He should be getting "sell the team" chants already. He's torturing the staff, the coaches, and contrary to his bullshit through doing so making things way worse for the players as well (not that only the players matter!)

This Is Just To Say

I have turned off
the AI features
that were in
the update

and which
you were probably
hoping
to monetize

Fuck you
they were stupid
so unnecessary
and so annoying

This whole collection is seriously amazing. Grab a copy here: bookshop.org/lists/litbow...