mztwo

What's so shocking in the brashness of their claims: - UMG alleges that training generative AI on any of their artists is a "breach of our agreements and a violation of copyright law." - We are asked, which side of history to we want to be on? Apparently, original AI-generated content that imitates artists is siding with "deep fakes, fraud, and denying artists their due compensation."

The song was labeled as a wholly original, AI-generated song and in now way misrepresented itself. Many of my lawyer friends say this is testing new boundaries on copyright law because of what UMG is claiming.

As GPUs like Nvidia's H100 cost over $30,000, Microsoft's own AI chip appears to arrive at a very opportune time to enable the company to pursue a very aggressive AI strategy.

The sheer size and scope of a single scam is absolutely astounding here -- and who knows how many others have yet to be discovered.

When I search for new generative AI tools, it really does start to feel like a Wild West out there.

From a pure numbers perspective, it's no question that it's a good rush. I think Sam Lessin's perspective that the incumbents may reap most of the rewards here is interesting to consider --- some of the dynamics of the generative AI market aren't like previous software categories that were newly developed. Here, generative AI is seeing integration into all kinds of existing workflows.

What does a post intellectual property world even look like, though? I'm not aware of any convincing frameworks that our existing society could merge into.

From reading Reddit and seeing how people are dealing with Bing Chat's embedding of sources, it sounds like there is a lot of unanswered anxiety around what will happen to the internet if anything you put out there simply gets regurgitated by an LLM, often w/o attribution.

I'll be curious to see how this set of regulations helps put content attribution on a better path.

Stability AI, Midjourney, DeviantArt etc. have already been sued, so there will be a lot of action in the years ahead.

The AI Act has been under development since 2021 (it's the EU... so it takes time) -- but news broke this week that there are additional provisions under discussion specifically designed to address the rise of chatbots. My full summary of the act itself and the a breakdown of these new provisions is contained within the article.

Some notable things that stood out in the article are:

Even baseline responses from a "good" persona would rate quite high on the toxicity scale the researchers used.

There seems to be broad bias from all personas (and no-persona responses) towards certain topics of race, gender and politics.

The legal consequences of whether this could be considered defamation are interesting to consider as well.

Not surprising: The Nixon persona was 3x more toxic than Nelson Mandela.

I echo with your take. There's a lot of uncertainty, and in the meantime there's change that can be painful for some groups of professionals.

As the news media and twitterverse peddled the whole "crime-ridden SF" angle, I felt myself getting drawn into the same topic and agreeing with numerous friends on how much the city has declined. This is a good reminder of how we gravitate towards powerful emotional narratives, which in the moment can feel absolutely true despite an utter lack of supporting facts on an individual murder case.

I hope this brings some measure of peace and closure for his family and friends.

Google is where projects go to die. Several friends who have joined via M&A have shared they had little expectations of seeing their babies continue in any way, shape of form after purchase by Google.

While I don't know this founder, his excellent writeup summarizes my understanding of the culture w/r/t innovation: https://medium.com/@pravse/the-maze-is-in-the-mouse-980c57cf...

Source for this is the Run of World article linked in the document. Their China journalist spoke with recruiters who work on video game illustrator roles and gave background info on the trend and decrease.

I'd like to think this is similar to how Silicon Valley recruiters (the good ones, at least) have a strong pulse on the market and can share trends well in advance of them making it into any mainstream publications like WSJ or NYTimes.

Absolutely stunning how quickly this has disrupted an entire profession.

Lots of immediate business from companies needing humans to spin up their models though... but as LLMs get more advanced it's anyone's guess what will happen here.

Yep - you highlighted exactly what raised my eyebrow as I was writing the article.

To add to that, the leaked documents from Snowden described a query language not unlike doing Boolean searches. Nothing close to GPT’s ability to comprehend human asks.

Anecdotally, several CTOs I know intend to lessen their use of Scale, Labelbox and more in the future. Talked to one today who already ditched MTurk for GPT-4 -- cheaper, better, faster was what he said.

Labelbox does image annotating still, and one CTO said as soon as GPT-4 enabled this for him he'd have his team homebrew it from there.

Buried in an arXiv paper was this nugget. Thought I'd share!

I would say the study itself is a groundbreaking milestone in the architecture it posits. The human behavior... quite mundane I agree! I watched the full demo twice and it reminded me of the more boring parts of the Sims 4. But maybe that's the magic as well?

One outcome of this study was that a panel of evaluators judged the bot interactions to be more "human" than when humans impersonated these characters. So you have a point.

The paper explains that they used a panel of evaluators to judge the "humanness" of the interactions : )

Curious -- where do you think the article oversells the research paper? In reading through the full study a few times, what stood out to me was the impression these Generative Agents left on the authors -- despite having mostly mundane interactions (which real humans do too), it was the emergent behaviors, totally unplanned, that seemed to delight the researchers.

What the researchers bolted on is an architecture that enables the storage and recall of memories, as well as self-reflection and more. They call out early the paper that even standard ChatGPT is not quite capable of this. ChatGPT here is used to provide the natural language abilities.

The authors of the study were clear to call out there are quite a few downsides to mass adoption of Generative Agents... the pollution and misinformation angle certainly being top of mind. I'm inclined to agree.

The authors used gpt-3.5-turbo which does not like to spew adult content.

Meta is reportedly weighing the option of exempting politicians from AI-generated image restrictions, raising concerns about potential disinformation and the impact on the democratic process, especially with the 2024 US Presidential election approaching.

A mayor in Australia has threatened to sue OpenAI for defamation over false claims made by ChatGPT about his involvement in a bribery scandal. If initiated, this lawsuit could be the first-ever defamation case against an AI chatbot and a landmark moment in legal history.

Founder here, on the business side but I've seen and heard plenty of stories about companies where things don't go as planned. Please share even a throwaway email with us - happy to share insights and legal info with you.