chungusamongus

5 ms·

1.
by chungusamongus 10d ago
>Do not give me LLM output unless you also give me the full prompt text. Umm the point is you won't know to ask this question in the first place, and even if you did, you wouldn't have any leverage to demand this because you&#x
2.
by chungusamongus 26d ago
IIRC the courts ruled that because it would be implausibe for a person to use google books previews to read an entire work (you'd have to make a whole bunch of separate accounts to do so), it could not plausibly impact the market for t
3.
by chungusamongus 27d ago
It's not big news if you know anything about Europe in relation to IP law. No one expected a different result.
4.
by chungusamongus 27d ago
Did anyone expect it to go the other way? Europe is more hardcore about copyright than the US, and that's saying something. Germany is practically...well I was going to say they're nazis about it but perhaps that's in poor ta
5.
by chungusamongus 27d ago
Lmao. No. Content that is wholesale generated by AI is also not subject to copyright in the US. It relies on the honor system and you can always modify the material juuuust enough that you can claim the copyright. In practical terms, this c
6.
by chungusamongus 27d ago
The same is true in the US. This is a nothing burger.
7.
by chungusamongus 1mo ago
Sounds like an elaborate rationale to be lazy.
8.
by chungusamongus 1mo ago
Well, youre trading quality for accessibility. For some, that's acceptable. To me, the number of steam games that emulate that aesthetic is so massive that its become oversaturated in my view. And in fairness, there was a major quality
9.
by chungusamongus 1mo ago
Nintendo is notoriously litigious.
10.
by chungusamongus 1mo ago
I consider all homebrew stuff very cool but the number of games emulating PS1 / N64 aesthetics is so massively oversaturated at this point that I'm kind of burned out on it. But in general, the thing that really impresses me is wh
11.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
But You've spent so much more time complaining and rationalizing your biases than it would take to simply read the story.
12.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
Really? It just seems aggressively stupid.
13.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
It is circular. The conclusion of your argument is included in the premises. Textbook begging the question, which is circular reasoning. "Slop" existed before AI. Just because LLMs were involved in the writing of a text does not m
14.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
That's not what I said. Do you have trouble reading? Are you subliterate or just lazy?
15.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
Please explain where I went wrong. Please explain why the onus is on the person presenting this story to account for all of the bad uses of AI, such that we should simply dismiss the story outright. This is pure idiocy.
16.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
This took a few minutes for me to read. If that's what you consider high effort, that's a bigger problem. Ofc, reading comprehension is fairly poor these days but that was a trend before AI. Maybe you're just subliterate. And
17.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
Yes, it is. Working on a sega genesis homebrew game. I focus on visuals, dialogue, narrative logic, music, etc., and GPT worries about the rest. It works for me. I couldn't care less if works for others. I'm working on the part I
18.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
You have done nothing to demonstrate how that's even relevant here. The person who posted this is not "bad" simply because they have used an LLM.
19.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
>The part that I personally find difficult is that I can’t easily gauge the amount of human effort put in. The amount of effort is not relevant. If I spend all day trying the jump my car battery in 100 degree weather, only to find that t
20.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
Then just state the conflict of interest instead of resorting to insults. The problem with your way of thinking is, sometimes your opponent is detestable, but that doesn't make them wrong. Kneejerk dismissal of an argument on the basis
21.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
That's circular reasoning
22.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
And the signal I'm sending is, when I see people do that, I find it to be lazy and totally irrelevant to the content.
23.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
Then why are you trying to debate me?
24.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
It says it was written by deepseek v4. You are making it sound like they're being deceptive. Life is too short yet you waste it complaining about things like this. I dont think you're wise. Youre provincial.
25.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
Fwiw I am much more impressed with the sophistication of someone's argument than i am their writing style. Kant has contributed much more than parfit depsite the abstract nature of his writing and it's not even close.
26.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
Kant is a better writer than the vast majority of writers. The problem is, the ideas he is trying to articulate are incredibly abstract. Hegel is like this too
27.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
I didn't think it "sucked" to read. Anyway that's an aesthetic qualm, not a counterargument. Also the story has a disclaimer saying it was written by deepseek. I might have an issue if they were being deceptive. But that
28.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
The model was trained on the code of the program that runs it, so it knows that program's bugs better than the humans who wrote the program. So it finds a tiny flaw and uses it to break out and copy itself in a place nobody will look..
29.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
The cost of reading this story is not high; you are just lazy and easily distracted. It took 5 minutes to read. You took more time to respond to this comment than it took to simply read the story.
30.
by chungusamongus 2mo ago
You are assuming because someone used an llm to help articulate the argument, that it did not require effort to formulate. That's fallacious.

More ›