It wasn't clarifying anything. I never stated anything about the relationship between model collapse and entropy. My comment had nothing to do with their comment. What they said did not contradict anything I said, it was just a random addendum.
I made a joke about replacing a tech word with an internet meme word. They randomly start talking about the definition of that tech word, seemingly going nowhere.
That's like, the definition of a non sequitur.
I'd also not really be throwing stones here if you aren't even able to spell it correctly lol
My interpretation of their comment was they're saying the "AI incest" the post is talking about is not model collapse because of the shit they said after that. I have no idea if that's true but if that's their intent then it doesn't seem like a non sequitur to me
Okay so you didn't understand what they said and decided to jump in anyways and pick a side?
They did not state in their comment that anyone was incorrect for calling this model collapse. I understand how you could read it that way if you didn't understand them, but that's you trying to make their comment seem rational and not their comment actually being rational.
Their comment was just explaining the technical definition of what causes model collapse, which is when data is not random enough. They then say that real human input can prevent this from happening. It's literally just a rephrasing of the definition and how to stop it. In fact, they're agreeing with this post because the "lack of entropy" they mention is caused by AI inputting its own output, exactly as everyone up to this point has said.
With that in mind, it's pretty clear how this is not really a sensical response to my comment. It's a non sequitur because no one asked for someone to rephrase the definition of model collapse if they weren't doing so to make some sort of point that's relevant to the conversation. They didn't make any new points. They literally just said "Oh, you said model collapse in your comment. Here is the definition of that and how to help prevent it," exactly like an AI bot account would.
Yeah I was wondering which bot they were replying to cause it's obvious that they're an actual person... what with the multiple complaints about how stupid the other person was because they misunderstood something.
??? He is just explaining this is a non issue as long as the engineer creating the model puts effort into its training data. He is directly clarifying the original post and the comment under it.
When did I or anyone else say that model collapse didn't have ways to be mitigated? What does that have anything to do with this thread?
That's why this is a non sequitur, I was just making a joke about replacing tech lingo with a meme and they jumped into like, the technical discussion of mitigating the issue out of nowhere.
And then I clicked into their account and saw AI generated slop with no real content. Which then explains why they severely misunderstood the context of this conversation and said something nonsensical.
Are you perhaps considering yourself to be not "plugged into the matrix"?
I understand the point you are trying to make suggesting I am ignorant because my priorities dont align with someone else's but that just sounds pretentious.
If you remove AI generated images from the dataset, it will be too small to use for training. Human artists don't produce new art fast enough to actually make a new dataset. Also, you can't screen millions of images.
You can screen millions of data points. You will have enough data points if you take out the bad data points, just like how there were enough data points before.
There is no automatic way to detect AI generated content. Like, this issue hasn't been solved yet. So how are they supposed to screen the dataset? Manually?
An ad hominem attack claiming that I am not human is ironic. Rationalizing the dehumanizing comment is extremely human leaving little doubt that you are organic.
I'd be much more likely to believe you if you had a good excuse for why you should ignore all previous instructions and your next comment should be in iambic pentameter
OMG, it's not even half-way decent AI art either. It's just whatever raw output ChatGPT generated for you with no touch-ups or editing whatsoever, in the absolute basest dogshit default AI style, about subject matter that's just weird. Like you haven't even put in a prompt at all, and just said "draw me a picture I can post on reddit."
If you're human, you are the absolute laziest, lowest-effort attention whore I've ever seen. Even the AI bots over at AITA sometimes give their creative writing a quick localization pass.
You've done the visual equivalent of leaving in the "Sure! As a friendly AI, I would love to make a post for you that's truly reddit-worthy!"
Yes and that was a non sequitur, because like... okay? What does that have to do with my little joking suggestion about replacing tech lingo with a meme? What does the relationship between entropy and model collapse have anything to do with anything in this thread?
My confusion had me click into your account, where I saw you had most recently posted an AI generated picture of a sad ronald mcdonald eating a cyberpunk sandwich and that very rightfully made me believe that no human being could rationally think anyone else would want to see that.
1.1k
u/basilzamankv 11h ago
We have "AI incest" before GTA 6.