cm0002theFutureOfCommunication
shneancypeople will already ignore half the questions you ask in an e-mail even if you make them into bullet points
If you ever find a way around this let me know, it’s maddening. Especially overseas contacts where I have to wait a day in-between responses, sometimes it takes a week or more to get what I need.
Write a series of single query per e-mail.
Set then up on delayed delivery every hour through their workday.
It only takes once or twice until people read your entire e-mails.
working really hard on shaking people by the shoulders through the internet
Talk about broken telephone.
CubitOomI can’t wait for the day that I can just send my ai digital twin to the meeting to talk to all the other ais and just focus on building my resume so I can jump to a better paying job where I don’t have to actually do anything because companies don’t need to make profit anymore just stock growth.
Yeah but what if you’re the AI twin and you’re in the metaverse right now playing out a recursive simulation? Is focusing on better paying jobs really what you want to spend your time doing?
Keanureeveswhoa.gif
I certainly would rather focus on making money for myself then a company if those are my two choices during work hours.
But really, I’d rather be farming and playing with my daughter.
[deleted] in lemmyPlus it is as accurate as using an automatic translator to change it to another language and back again!
I remember when compression was popularized, like mp3 and jpg, people would run experiments where they would convert lossy to lossy to lossy to lossy over and over and then share the final image, which was this overcooked nightmare
I wonder if a similar dynamic applies to the scenario presented in the comic with AI summarization and expansion of topics. Start with a few bullet points have it expand that to a paragraph or so, have it summarize it back down to bullet points, repeat 4-5 times, then see how far off you get from the original point.
In my experience, LLMs aren’t really that good at summarizing
It’s more like they can “rewrite more concisely” which is a bit different
If it isn’t accurate to the source material, it isn’t concise.
LLMs are good at reducing word count.
In case you haven’t seen it, Tom7 created a delightful exploration of using an LLM to manipulate word counts.
Badness 0 (Apostrophe‛s version)
Never before seen pilot episode.Keywords: TypesIf you see any errors, please post about them in the comment section!Source code, papers, etc.: http://tom7.or...
I used to play this game with Google translate when it was newish
translation party!
Throw Japanese into English into Japanese into English ad nauseum, untill an ‘equilibrium’ statement is reached.
… Which was quite often nowhere near the original statement, in either language… but at least the translation algorithm agreed with itself.
There is, or maybe was, a YouTube channel that would run well known song lyrics through various layers of translation, then attempt to sing the result to the tune of the original.
Gradually watermelon… I like shapes.
Twisted translations
Sounds about right to me.
🎵Once you know which one, you are acidic, to win!🎵
Google Translate Sings: "I'll Make A Man Out of You" from Mulan (ft. Caleb Hyles)
mercSummarizing requires understanding what’s important, and LLMs don’t “understand” anything.
They can reduce word counts, and they have some statistical models that can tell them which words are fillers. But, the hilarious state of Apple Intelligence shows how frequently that breaks.
you mean hallucinate
A couple decades ago, novelty and souvenir shops would sell stuffed parrots which would electronically record a brief clip of what they heard and then repeat it back to you.
If you said "Hello" to a parrot and then set it down next to another one, it took only a couple of iterations between the parrots to turn it into high pitched squealing.
Reminds me of this classic video www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-7mQhSZRgM
Dueling Carls, a "Talking Carl" Scream Fight
Are humans doing this as well and if they don’t, why not?
Humans do this yes. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_game
AdrianTheFrogPeople do that with google translate as well
i was curious so i tried it with chatgpt. here are the chat links:
first expansion first summary second expansion second summary third expansion third summary fourth expansion fourth summary fifth expansion fifth summary sixth expansion sixth summary
overall it didn’t seem too bad. it sort of started focusing on the ecological and astrobiological side of the same topic but didn’t completely drift. to be honest, i think it would have done a lot worse if i made the prompt less specific. if it was just “summarize this text” and “expand on these points” i think chatgpt would get very distracted
Interesting. I also wonder how it would fare across different models (eg user a uses chatgpt, user b uses gemini, user c uses deepseek, etc) as that may mimic real world use (such as what’s depicted in the comic) more closely
PapstJL4UDoesn’t chatgpy remember the context of the previous question and text?
Maybe a difference in accounts and llms makes a bigget difference.
that’s why i ran every request in a different chat session
Real Genius (1985)
Brought that song right back into my head.
I’m Falling by Comsat Angels for anyone interested.
Comsat Angels - I'm Falling [1985]
Meta encoder-decoder
Should swap it around. Send tight, short human readable email. Use LLM to expand and add flowery language for those that want it.
The problem is that too often people interpret tight emails as being rude or angry. But, LLMs aren’t the solution. The solution is to adjust people’s expectations.
explodicleHow the heck do we do that?
Be concise. If someone misinterprets, apologize. Continue to be concise.
This reminds me of using speech to text to send a text message. Then using text to speech to listen to the text messages. All to avoid voicemails.
But that is reasonable. You can edit text better and decide what information goes in it (emotions, surroundings, …). Also text is compatible with other technologies, especially search.
Cosmic ClericWanting to talk to other human beings and only getting responses from AI/LLMs is horrible, and a detriment the humanity solving its problems (which may be the point).
What is the link for?
Why would this prevent us from doing anything?
It’s an anti commercial license. The thought is that, they don’t mind if people copy their comments, save them, re use them, etcetera, they just don’t want people to make money off of them, likely this is a response to AI companies profiting off of user comments
However I’m not sure if just linking the license without context that the comment itself is meant to be licensed as such would be effective if it came down to brass tacks I don’t know if it would hold up.
Instead they should say something like
‘this work is licensed under the CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license’
I’m also not sure how it works with the licenses of the instance it’s posted on, and the instances that federate with, store and reproduce the content.
Sounds like some sovereign citizen bullshit to me.
People deserve more control over their data and lives but lets not go kidding ourselves.
I just think they don’t understand how copyright and licenses work. If you create a work, you own the copyright. If you license it to someone (even when using a restrictive CC license) you are granting others rights that they hadn’t before. It doesn’t get more restrictive than just not licensing your comment.
I’m also not sure how it works with the licenses of the instance it’s posted on, and the instances that federate with, store and reproduce the content.
My understanding is a license would stays with the content, no matter where the content is replicated. I also declare that my content is licensed in my user account description as well.
As far as the labeling goes, I normally have it say a little more than what I did in my last comment. Having read your comment and double checking on the Creative Commons site, I did decide to change it to be more descriptive as you advised.
But if you go back through my personal comment history, about nine and a half months or so, you’ll see that there’s been a large quantity conversation about this licensing link, so having just recently returned to Lemmy I was trying to shorten it down, figuring just the actual license information itself was enough of the declaration.
~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~
Friend did you just copyright your lemmy comment under creative Commons v4?
ThotDragonCopyright usually exists simply by them writing the comment. By adding a license they are communicating to others under what terms the comment is being made available to you .
I’ve noticed this a lot lately. Extremely long winded and well written emails that could just be a few bullet points.
Give me the human version please. If your email fills my entire screen it’s going through the GPT gauntlet and if your point is lost that’s kinda on you.
Best reason to play with the models is to recognize when other people are using them for real work.
Turns out the “artificial” in artificial intelligence is at the user level.
And the intelligence is nowhere to be seen.
The incentives in a corporation are misaligned with the decision makers. They want promotions and more employees under them to justify their own raises. Obviously this would be the end result, just look at politics as well.
And many people still believe the myth that competition forces businesses to be efficient or they will fail, and lack of competition likewise makes government inefficient. In truth, a business can be as inefficient as it can afford to be, and the larger and richer the company, the higher that ceiling is.
Companies are only a few years away from being able to fire the majority of their office workers and replace them with AI.
If you think I am wrong, you fail to understand office work or the rapid pace at which AI is advancing.
Our technological advancement is on the precipice of outpacing our ability to adapt to it; that ends very badly for most people.
Sorry this is just plain wrong and there’s no evidence of this at all.
People have been saying this since the invention of the comptometer.
Anyone who’s job can be replaced by an LLM isnt producing any value.
For the rest of us it’s an incremental improvement at best.
I am talking about a more advanced AI, not even true AI. LLMs are Temu AI, the name brand stuff is going to wreck the workforce.
There’s no evidence that “more advanced AI” is going to emerge in the next few years.
darklamerAnyone who’s job can be replaced by an LLM isnt producing any value.
Well, that’s the problem right there, isn’t it, that a lot of jobs don’t actually produce any real value.