Prince.Skeletor
Don’t Be Like He-Man
Jobs gonna disappear
The A.I Megathread (LLM , GPT , Development)
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24425889/opera_chatgpt_browser.jpeg)
Opera’s building ChatGPT into its sidebar
Opera’s new AI tool can summarize webpages and articles.
www.theverge.com
Opera’s building ChatGPT into its sidebar
/The company’s testing a new AI-powered ‘shorten’ feature that provides bulleted summaries of the article or webpage you’re reading.
:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24425889/opera_chatgpt_browser.jpeg)
Opera’s new tool summarizes webpages, and it apparently works on Verge articles! Image: Opera
By EMMA ROTH
Feb 11, 2023, 4:59 PM EST
Opera’s adding a ChatGPT-powered tool to its sidebar that generates brief summaries of webpages and articles. The feature, called “shorten,” is part of the company’s broader plans to integrate AI tools into its browser, similar to what Microsoft’s doing with Edge.
As shown in a demo included in Opera’s blog post, you can activate the feature by selecting the “shorten” button to the right of the address bar. From there, a sidebar with ChatGPT will pop out from the left, which will then generate a neat, bulleted summary of the article or webpage you’re looking at.
Opera’s announcement comes just days after Microsoft revealed the AI-powered Bing and Edge. While the company’s search engine will offer access to an AI chatbot that provides annotated answers to queries, Edge will come with an AI “copilot” that can similarly summarize webpages or articles, as well as generate text for social media posts and more. Google also showed off its AI search bot Bard earlier this week, although it’s not available for users to demo just yet.
“We are excited to see the rapid roll-out of developer programs for solutions such as Google Bard, for example, and are starting to build and roll out new experiences in web browsing that not very long ago seemed impossible to achieve,” Per Wetterdal, Opera’s head of strategic partnerships and AI ecosystem says in a statement.
The “shorten” feature isn’t available to everyone just yet, though. Jan Standel, the vice president of marketing and communications at Opera, tells The Verge that it’s going to “launch in browsers very soon.” Opera’s also working on other AI-powered features that “augment” the browsing experience and plans on adding “popular AI-generated content services to the sidebar,” although it’s not yet clear what this could entail.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/20790695/acastro_200730_1777_ai_0001.jpg)
Hands-on with the new Bing: Microsoft’s step beyond ChatGPT
Microsoft is taking on Google search in a big way.
www.theverge.com
Sauce Mane
Superstar
We’re still at baby steps with AI
Just look at smartphones, take a smartphone from 2010 and compare it to smartphone that was released after 2020. It’s a night and day difference
In 10 years AI will be very impressive and scary
Just look at smartphones, take a smartphone from 2010 and compare it to smartphone that was released after 2020. It’s a night and day difference
In 10 years AI will be very impressive and scary
Wink Beaufield
Superstar
AI will fukk up patent offices around the world.
The core job of a patent examiner is to search for prior art before granting an inventor a patent. AI will have a field day finding prior inventions.
Great thread 
Magic Mulatto
Here Today, Gone Tomorrow. . .
Issa wrap outchea…
Streets is done…
Streets is done…
AI-Created Comic Officially Loses Copyright Protection Rights for Its Images
An AI-created comic book maintains its copyright for the story of the comic, but not the AI-created images within the comic
www.cbr.com
AI-Created Comic Officially Loses Copyright Protection Rights for Its Images
An AI-created comic book maintains its copyright for the story of the comic, but not the AI-created images within the comic
BYBRIAN CRONIN
PUBLISHED 1 DAY AGO
The United States Copyright Office (USCO) has issued its official ruling regarding a previously copyrighted comic book where the art was created using "A.I. art" and the results were a bit of a split decision, with the story for the comic and the specific compilation of the story with the images within the comic both remaining under copyright, but the copyright for the individual images within the comic book has been revoked.
Kris Kashtanova announced last year that they had received a U.S. copyright on their comic book, Zarya of the Dawn, a comic book inspired by their late grandmother that she created with the text-to-image engine Midjourney. Soon after the comic was initially copyrighted, the USCO discovered through Kahtanova's social media postings that the images for the comic were created using "A.I. art," at which point the Office requested further information on the matter. At the end of last year, it tentatively determined it would revoke the copyright protection on the art in the comic, but gave Kashtanova and her attorneys a month to appeal the decision. That time having passed, the final ruling has now been issued on the matter.
Why doesn't the United State Copyright Office consider "A.I. art" to be copyrightable?
In its ruling, the USCO laid out its general position on copyrights involving A.I., which is to say that “the Office will not register works produced by a machine or mere mechanical process that operates randomly or automatically without any creative input or intervention from a human author."In this specific instance, the USCO notes, "Rather than a tool that Ms. Kashtanova controlled and guided to reach her desired image, Midjourney generates images in an unpredictable way. Accordingly, Midjourney users are not the 'authors' for copyright purposes of the images the technology generates," and that "ecause of the significant distance between what a user may direct Midjourney to create and the visual material Midjourney actually produces, Midjourney users lack sufficient control over generated images to be treated as the 'master mind' behind them."
In other words, the USCO believes that Kashtanova never had direct control over what images would be created, but rather they just picked through the randomly generated images until they found images they felt worked for the comic. The choice of which images should be paired with the text is, as noted, copyrightable as a compilation, but the individual images would be considered having "no modicum of creativity," as they were randomly created.
What is the argument for "A.I. art" to be copyrightable?
The argument by Kashtanova and her attorneys is that the USCO is being unfair in how it determines predictability. As Kashtanova's attorney, Van Lindberg, noted in his reaction to the ruling, Jackson Pollack's paintings were all copyrightable, and yet, "Pollack famously couldn't predict how the paint he used would drip onto the canvas. Pollack designed his paintings - he knew what he wanted the end result to be - but he used a process involving random dripping and flicking of paint to make his art."
Similarly, then, while Kashtanova might not have known specifically what Midjourney would create, they knew what it would draw in general terms, as the prompt inherently had some guidance involved. For instance, if the prompt is "yellow squirrel," while you might not know what kind of image of a yellow squirrel Midjourney will create, you know that it will be a yellow squirrel, so that should qualify for the "modicum of creativity" that the USCO insists is required.
It appears, then, that the future of USCO decisions regarding A.I. art is how much of a human element the USCO believes is involved in the creation of the images.
Source: Twitter
Comfortably Numb (@ygalanter@hachyderm.io)
Attached: 1 image I like it that the new Bing has no scruples whatsoever.
edit:
Complexion
ʇdᴉɹɔsǝɥʇdᴉlɟ
Return of the (false) King.
OpenCage (@opencage@en.osm.town)
We wrote a blog post about our on-going nightmare: ChatGPT recommends us for a service we don't provide. Dozens of people are signing up to our site every day and then getting frustrated when "it doesn't work". Hugely frustrating. https://blog.opencagedata.com/post/dont-believe-chatgpt...
Don't believe ChatGPT - we do NOT offer a "phone lookup" service
TL;DR ChatGPT claims we offer an API to turn a mobile phone number into the location of the phone. We do not.
blog.opencagedata.com
Don't believe ChatGPT - we do NOT offer a "phone lookup" service
23 Feb 2023TL;DR ChatGPT claims we offer an API to turn a mobile phone number into the location of the phone. We do not.
Our story begins. “Hey, ChatGPT is cool”
Like everyone else when ChatGPT launched a few months ago we dove in and played with. It is impressive.In January, as the new AI queston and answer service became more and more popular, we noticed something interesting. Some new OpenCage users were starting to answer “ChatGPT” when we asked them how they had heard of us during the sign-up flow for our geocoding API. Fantastic, we thought. Over the last eight weeks this initial trickle of new sign-ups has become a steady flow.
But then something weird happened.
“Actually, no, this is not cool”
Many of these new users seemed to use the free trial of our geocoding API for just a handful of API requests and then stopped completely. Very different from the behaviour of other free trial signups.We reached out to some of these users and asked why they had stopped. A few answered with some varient of “it didn’t work”, which of course alarmed us.
“Not cool at all”
As we dug into this it became clear most of of these new ChatGPT users were tying to use our geocoding API for an entirely different purpose. It seems ChatGPT is wrongly recommending us for “reverse phone number lookup” - ie the ability to determine the location of a mobile phone solely based on the number. This is not a service we provide. It is not a service we have ever provided, nor a service we have any plans to provide. Indeed, it is a not a service we are technically capable of providing.And yet ChatGPT has absolutely no problem recommending us for this service (complete with python code you can cut and paste) as you can see in this screenshot.
Looking at ChatGPT’s well formulated answer, it’s understandable people believe this will work.
“This is really lame, actually”
The situation is hugely frustrating for everyone. For us, and for the users who sign up believing we can offer this service. We’re now getting support requests every single day asking us “Why is it not working?”.Why does ChatGPT “think” this?
You may be wondering “Why would ChatGPT ‘think’ they offer this service?” No doubt it’s due to the faulty YouTube tutorials people have made where they seem to claim we can do this, as we covered previously. ChatGPT has picked up that content.The key difference is that humans have learned to be sceptical when getting advice from other humans, for example via a video coding tutorial. It seems though that we haven’t yet fully internalized this when it comes to AI in general or ChatGPT specifically. The other key difference is the sheer scale of the problem. Bad tutorial videos got us a handful of frustrated sign-ups. With ChatGPT the problem is several orders of magnitude bigger.
What now?
Unfortunately it’s not really clear how to solve this. All suggestions are welcome. ChatGPT is doing exactly what its makers intended - producing a coherent, believable answer. Whether that answer is truthful does not seem to matter in the slightest.I wrote this post to have a place to send our new ChatGPT users when they ask why it isn’t work, but hopefully also it serves as a warning to others - you absolutely can not trust the output of ChatGPT to be truthful,
Happy geocoding (NOT “phone lookup”),
Complexion
ʇdᴉɹɔsǝɥʇdᴉlɟ
not everyone is looking for a master to serve.
this isn't a religious thread.
What makes you think you're going to have a choice? Your childrens children will be getting iPhones directly implanted in their eyes with the rest of the new jack jits that are online via neural net connections.
Energy flows where the attention goes. Most of the world are already worshiping the screen. Do you know what that means?
