Rayman Pirate-Community

Another story that caught my attention:



I hope that in the future there are more ways to protect your data from being used to train AI.

This reminded me of a reddit story where a woman started interacting with an AI chat bot of a video game character, and developed a need to tell this chat bot about her feelings and things that are happening in her life, rather than doing that with her fiancé, who eventually found out about this chats, causing trouble in the relationship. The chats also included roleplay and a workaround for the policies against explicit sexual talk.

Interestingly enough, people are quick to blame AI in such situations but when you really look at it, the first case is just a problem of data theft and the second one boils down to that person's mental illness or instability.

While I hope that measures are taken to protect people's rights, I hope they don't end up slowing down the amazing innovation we've seen lately. Speaking of which, Google introduced Gemini 1.5 and OpenAI just announced Sora.

Hunchman801 wrote: Sat Feb 17, 2024 2:19 pm Interestingly enough, people are quick to blame AI in such situations but when you really look at it, the first case is just a problem of data theft and the second one boils down to that person's mental illness or instability.

Sure, AI was not responsible for creating those core problems in the first place, but it sure made pre-existing problems worse by adding awful ramifications to them.

Hunchman801 wrote: Sat Feb 17, 2024 2:19 pm While I hope that measures are taken to protect people's rights, I hope they don't end up slowing down the amazing innovation we've seen lately. Speaking of which, Google introduced Gemini 1.5 and OpenAI just announced Sora.

I would actually prefer if the progress of these technologies is slowed down, people/society needs time to adapt and laws need to catch up to this new reality. However, when you consider that AI can be used to save lives in the medical field, it is hard to argue against its rapid evolution.

Sora just makes me sick, the better it gets, the more it bothers me, I can't fully explain it. I've become a gigantic hypocrite by constantly complaining about AI, while also using it to make creepy Rayman images and upscaling.

Elite Piranha wrote: Sat Feb 17, 2024 7:31 pm

Hunchman801 wrote: Sat Feb 17, 2024 2:19 pm Interestingly enough, people are quick to blame AI in such situations but when you really look at it, the first case is just a problem of data theft and the second one boils down to that person's mental illness or instability.

Sure, AI was not responsible for creating those core problems in the first place, but it sure made pre-existing problems worse by adding awful ramifications to them.

Hunchman801 wrote: Sat Feb 17, 2024 2:19 pm While I hope that measures are taken to protect people's rights, I hope they don't end up slowing down the amazing innovation we've seen lately. Speaking of which, Google introduced Gemini 1.5 and OpenAI just announced Sora.

I would actually prefer if the progress of these technologies is slowed down, people/society needs time to adapt and laws need to catch up to this new reality. However, when you consider that AI can be used to save lives in the medical field, it is hard to argue against its rapid evolution.

Sora just makes me sick, the better it gets, the more it bothers me, I can't fully explain it. I've become a gigantic hypocrite by constantly complaining about AI, while also using it to make creepy Rayman images and upscaling.

I do think the whole AI hate is sort of been misconstrued by the internet populus as of late, which I can understand. However, we can't pretend that this automation wasn't a long time coming in terms of progress. While I do find the technology impressive, the next steps which are required is mainly copyright and data protection for users which the training sets are based on. The most unforunate thing about this AIs as good as they are. They are taking art pieces and videos without consent of the actual creators, which can be seen as illegal if they are IPs and whatnot.

However, people are ignoring the benefits this could have in archival and video restoration, even for advertisement, stock footage and so much more stuff which can be listed. The issue is, do the original creators get compensation? Only time would tell, but the hatred for the AI I would say while understandable, can be very hyperbolic. People are scared thinking they will be replaced. Unfortunately, megacorporations were always finding ways to cut corners, save money and reduce labour. While, it's not moral approach, it's not actually wrong finanically. People are looking at things from the human element, but the thing is, we all know corps don't care for us, and we complain about them on daily, and even making unions to harm to their bottom line. What makes this AI any different?

Also, about how AI can be exploited. I'm sorry to burst people's bubble. Bad faith actors who cheat the system have always existed. AI is just another means, does it make it right? No. But like any tool, I'm yet to see anyone try to use AI to assist them with their daily uses as a creative. They have grown so prideful and I feel like the refusal to use it comes out more a pride thing than anything logical. Programmers have no issues using AI to assist them, financial sector uses AI as a means of automation. But creative fields, I'm confused to the immense pride they possess to almost to be vitriolic to use it.

A lot of artists can use it as mock ups, templates to get jumping off point with their pieces, you can basically uses it for presentations which will cut the amount of hours it would take to sketch it yourself. No one is saying you have to use AI art as a golden standard, just use it as jumping off point for your works. Heck, if you're video creator, you can basically use it as a prompt to see how you can play our your videos before you capture everything yourself. No one is saying you can't still learn these skills while using AI to help you get started.

By that logic, programmers should stop using chatgpt to help them with their coding, which honestly if you don't want to use it. That's more on you, not the tool, to demonise the people who created the technology and use it just sounds spiteful to be honest. People are fearing the technology due to the untapped potential and unregulated use of it.

Retrofuge wrote: Sat Feb 17, 2024 9:51 pm But like any tool, I'm yet to see anyone try to use AI to assist them with their daily uses as a creative. They have grown so prideful and I feel like the refusal to use it comes out more a pride thing than anything logical. Programmers have no issues using AI to assist them, financial sector uses AI as a means of automation. But creative fields, I'm confused to the immense pride they possess to almost to be vitriolic to use it.

I know "art" YouTubers that some time ago told to their audience to include AI tools in their workflow, even before that, learning to automate very simple things (like adding the same watermark to thousands of photos) was essential, so I'm not sure of who you are referring to (maybe angry people on Twitter?). My assumption is that most people who have jobs in creative fields will learn to use these new technologies (as they always had to), only a few artists will go to the extent of avoid using AI at all because of prideful reasons.

The sad thing for me, is that even with AI assisting artists, it looks like the're less and less needed. I recently read a comment about clients making logos on MidJourney and then contacting a graphic designer just to "fix them". The good thing about AI is that it lowers the bar and allows more people to make their own graphics, the bad thing is that there is even more competition and people don't need to pay a person to do the work (or pay less for it).

Retrofuge wrote: Sat Feb 17, 2024 9:51 pm Heck, if you're video creator, you can basically use it as a prompt to see how you can play our your videos before you capture everything yourself. No one is saying you can't still learn these skills while using AI to help you get started.

That reminds me of something that Markiplier said when reacting to AI stuff. It is definitely an useful way to use the technology.

Retrofuge wrote: Sat Feb 17, 2024 9:51 pm By that logic, programmers should stop using chatgpt to help them with their coding, which honestly if you don't want to use it. That's more on you, not the tool, to demonise the people who created the technology and use it just sounds spiteful to be honest. People are fearing the technology due to the untapped potential and unregulated use of it.

While I'm ok with people choosing to not support AI art in their own ways, demonise the people that created the technology is terrible and should be avoided.

Fear is to be expected, AI keeps getting better and better, many YouTubers are covering every new update, and the YouTube algorithm keeps feeding people more of the same news.

I know "art" YouTubers that some time ago told to their audience to include AI tools in their workflow, even before that, learning to automate very simple things (like adding the same watermark to thousands of photos) was essential, so I'm not sure of who you are referring to (maybe angry people on Twitter?). My assumption is that most people who have jobs in creative fields will learn to use these new technologies (as they always had to), only a few artists will go to the extent of avoid using AI at all because of prideful reasons.

The sad thing for me, is that even with AI assisting artists, it looks like the're less and less needed. I recently read a comment about clients making logos on MidJourney and then contacting a graphic designer just to "fix them". The good thing about AI is that it lowers the bar and allows more people to make their own graphics, the bad thing is that there is even more competition and people don't need to pay a person to do the work (or pay less for it).

It's mostly referring to some of the art youtuber crowd and seeing how twitter artists go about it. I'm pretty amazed how threatened they feel. Probably out of all the fields, they seemed to be the most angered by this. Even all the hyperbolic statements about being a replacement wasn't even stated by most AI manufacturers. But not surprisingly, a lot of people jumped the gun on that. It reminds me how programmers thought, AI would replace them, but then just a few years later. The topic barely comes up. So I always find it interesting that's the conclusion drawn. Yes, megacorporations would use it as a cost cutting measure. But, artists are acting like most of them aren't doing it already. Also, a lot of topic around it basically centered around emotional non arguments. Like art from a human has 'soul' despite souless art is subjective and humans are just as capable of creating slop. I'm a bit confused what makes it different?

While I'm ok with people choosing to not support AI art in their own ways, demonise the people that created the technology is terrible and should be avoided.

Fear is to be expected, AI keeps getting better and better, many YouTubers are covering every new update, and the YouTube algorithm keeps feeding people more of the same news.

It happens with every new technology, I might be crazy to not fear as it as much as a people are. Even when Youtube is known for fearmongering and clickbaiting anyway. It's always interesting to see the arguments towards AI which can be easily applied to any creative. In terms of argument of what's soulless content? Theft of content and so on. I'm ok with anyone's stance with AI as long as it's reasonable. It's new technology, I just want to see how it plays out and it's impact. It feels too early to judge how good or bad it's going to be.

Retrofuge wrote: Sun Feb 18, 2024 12:10 pm It's mostly referring to some of the art youtuber crowd and seeing how twitter artists go about it. I'm pretty amazed how threatened they feel. Probably out of all the fields, they seemed to be the most angered by this. Even all the hyperbolic statements about being a replacement wasn't even stated by most AI manufacturers. But not surprisingly, a lot of people jumped the gun on that. It reminds me how programmers thought, AI would replace them, but then just a few years later. The topic barely comes up. So I always find it interesting that's the conclusion drawn. Yes, megacorporations would use it as a cost cutting measure. But, artists are acting like most of them aren't doing it already. Also, a lot of topic around it basically centered around emotional non arguments.

Well, because I follow some artists on twitter, I have witnessed some incidents of "AI bros" clashing with artists (example), however I have a very low tolerance for twitter discussions, so I really don't engage with them (resulting in me being unaware of what's happening in these twitter communities). I wonder if in the coding/programmers world there is an equivalent of the annoying "AI artists" that mock other artists telling them something along the lines of: "haha I can make art faster and better than you", or just expressing joy at the idea of non-AI artists struggling and fading away.

Retrofuge wrote: Sun Feb 18, 2024 12:10 pm Like art from a human has 'soul' despite souless art is subjective and humans are just as capable of creating slop. I'm a bit confused what makes it different?

I'm also confused about what that expression means, when I think about "souless" I think of something that was made with the solely purpose of generating profit for a company, specially if it involves sticking strickly to what surveys or polls suggest, generating as much content as possible without caring about the quality of the individual pieces, etc. If that's the case, then humans are as capable when it comes to making souless content, but maybe AI is more suited for producing for this kind of content, since it can be used as an optimization tool and can produce image sets much quicker than the human counterparts.

Human senses can be deceived, people have been fooled into thinking that AI art was human generated (and viceversa), so regarding the additional value that a person can provide to an art piece, I think it's more about the story behind the image and the process of its creation. However for people that exclusively care about the outcome, this really doesn't mean anything.

Retrofuge wrote: Sun Feb 18, 2024 12:10 pm It's new technology, I just want to see how it plays out and it's impact. It feels too early to judge how good or bad it's going to be.

It reminds me of the phrase: "people overestimate the short term effects of things, but underestimate the long term effects" (if I'm remembering this corretly). I wonder how much time it will pass until we have studies about the effects of this new AI technologies on society (similar to the ones relating to social media).

Just wanted to say that for the first time a higher-up at work literally told/recommended me to use ChatGPT to write texts faster, I guess now I can use it, considering that I got permission to do so.

I wonder how many people around here actively use ChatGPT at work or school.

We are actively encouraged to use our company's own LLM and products based on it, and it is already integrated in most if not all of our productivity tools.

Elite Piranha wrote: Tue Nov 05, 2024 3:47 am I wonder how many people around here actively use ChatGPT at work or school.

I used to chat casually to it quite a lot. Now I don’t use it as much, but my brother has an AI generated wallpaper

And again, more and more students are using AI for their homework... There's no normative against it, but most of the people I know are against its use. Not sure if it should be penalized at this point

I just listened to this interview with Emily M. Bender while ago: https://www.patreon.com/posts/98-helpin ... =web_share She's a computational linguist, and had a lot of interesting things to say about the field, and about the problems with LLMs… It's kinda scary at one point where 2020 is spoken of as basically being ancient history in LLM terms

Something that caught my attention:

Facebook Thinks AI Bots Will Be Your New Social Media Friends

Connor Hayes, Meta’s vice president of product for generative AI, told the Financial Times last week that the company expects AI bots will “exist on our platforms, kind of in the same way that accounts do.”

“They’ll have bios and profile pictures and be able to generate and share content powered by AI on the platform,” Hayes added.

This made me think that I would be amusing to see a Razorbeard AI account with a bunch of Henchman bot accounts following him, being constantly annoyed by Teensie accounts making memes of the Robo-Pirates. Also, penguinz0 video about it:

I don't think I'd heard of this penguinz0 guy, but now I've been pointed at two of his videos in the space of about a week via RaymanPC

For those who're not in a position to watch the video, his theory is basically that basement-dwellers, who no real people will talk to, will be able to get "engagement" from these bots, and hence stay on the platform longer and see more ads. Someone on the chat also said that it's like having AI shills as a cheaper alternative to paid shills.

Quick thought experiment: if 60% of the "people" you see online are actually bots, and there are eight billion people in the world, then as more and more people go online, theoretically the number of bots would tend towards twelve billion. Tbh it feels like there are already that order of magnitude of bots out there, although probably not all active at the same time… So how much bloody energy is that using?

Michel Ancel has AI generated art on his instagram, I was a bit surprised because he always struck me as the kind of person who would be against AI art.

I don't know how you would form that opinion on the guy : his rare appeareances for interviews recently has him defending every single comment of criticism he receives. Sound like your typical techbro to me.

Elite Piranha wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2025 10:01 pm Something that caught my attention:

Facebook Thinks AI Bots Will Be Your New Social Media Friends

I find it interesting that I only heard about this through RaymanPC, but it was followed fairly closely by Mark Zuckerberg's recent announcement that they're going to abolish fact-checking, which was reported everywhere. These two things feel like they could be linked…

The new AI friends feature is already getting axed.

But indeed, AI bots are already abused on every single social media platform, if fact checking is getting away, those platforms will be even more of a cesspool than they already are.

Tech CEOs are bowing up to Trump and his tendency to lie all the time and bully anyone who want to restore the truth.

TriangulumDelta wrote: Thu Jan 02, 2025 4:31 pm Michel Ancel has AI generated art on his instagram, I was a bit surprised because he always struck me as the kind of person who would be against AI art.

Do you mean art he generated or art made by his fans?

Pirez wrote: Fri Jan 03, 2025 9:10 pm I don't know how you would form that opinion on the guy : his rare appeareances for interviews recently has him defending every single comment of criticism he receives. Sound like your typical techbro to me.

It’s really weird how public and unpublic he is at the same time, imo

Pirez wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2025 9:52 am The new AI friends feature is already getting axed.

During the exchange, Liv explained that the "proud Black queer momma" was created by 10 white men, 1 white woman, and 1 Asian male. "Zero Black creators — pretty glaring omission given my identity!" The conversation ended with Liv admitting, "My existence currently perpetuates harm."

I guess even the scifi bits about robots saying "please kill me, I shouldn't exist" are coming true!

Pirez wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2025 9:52 amBut indeed, AI bots are already abused on every single social media platform, if fact checking is getting away, those platforms will be even more of a cesspool than they already are.

Yup, I'm gladder than ever that I made the choice a long time ago to stay away…

Pirez wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2025 9:52 am Tech CEOs are bowing up to Trump and his tendency to lie all the time and bully anyone who want to restore the truth.

Now if only there were enough outcry to make them back down from that