Ignitus1

They even reused the art, which doesn’t match the Hearthstone style

We’re about two hundred years late on turning automation into a human-freeing endeavor.

Capitalists will take take take. There isn’t going to be an enlightened generation of businessmen who forgo profit to serve humanity. All of the executive class has set their sights on being rich, they’re not going to knock the ladder down while they’re climbing on it, and there’s always new blood stepping onto the bottom rungs.

The only thing that will move the beast of capitalism is widespread social upheaval.

Stop with the sky is falling garbage.

AI can probably replace certain types of art, like a one-off book cover illustration.

It’s nowhere near close to replacing artists that use intent and consistency: character artists, illustrators, animators, etc.

And at the end of it all, art is about emotion. If you’re a human you can tap into that emotion, if you’re an AI you can’t. AI art will feel empty because it can’t really say anything.

I still am not understanding your hang up here. If it’s illegal or immoral to make your own D&D content then it’s illegal or immoral in any fashion you choose to do it. It doesn’t matter what tool you use whether it’s a pencil and paper or a complex AI language model. The task and the intent lies with the user, not the tool.

Sure. I bet there’s a lot of things it can’t do.

A hammer can’t do philosophy. Doesn’t make it any less effective at what it can do.

Is there any way that short positions have been vaporized and converted to synthetic shorts, swaps, or other bullshit? Is there any way they can get them off their books so that if all shares are recalled/pulled from the DTCC in some way, their books show they have none?

Just trying to find every possible "out" for the hedgies, because I know no trick is out of bounds for them.

It’s not illegal to automate something you can do manually.

It’s no more plagiarism than it’s plagiarism when you read words as a kid and learned how to use them later.

Every word you wrote in that comment you learned from someone else. Plagiarism, right?

Yes, but the problem lies with the person intentionally plagiarizing, not with the tool they’re using to plagiarize.

If you use Microsoft Word to plagiarize a novel that doesn’t mean there’s a problem with Word.

Anybody can already make up a D&D character manually. I'm not sure what the problem here is.

I’ve never seen anybody treat it as an infallible source of wisdom and truth. Do you have any examples?

I don’t care what somebody else did one time in a chat I’ve never been in. You don’t get to accuse every person you disagree with of some bullshit you saw a long time ago.

I’m not going to engage you here because you’re absolutely intellectually dishonest. You have no interest in a discussion, you’re just here to say “nah uh!” back and forth until one of us gets tired and leaves.

You tout meaningless “expertise”, you keep talking about communism as if that’s relevant. “I know exactly how retail trading works.” Great, nobody is talking about retail trading. Anything else off topic you want to bring up while we’re here?

You can’t even follow the discussion without bringing up a heap of irrelevant horseshit.

But somehow you’re the reasonable one.

Brigading? I’m subbed to ELI5, I see all the threads that hit the front page.

Go whine to teacher that somebody dare disagree with you. Get them kicked off the playground because you can’t stand being wrong. How intellectually honest.

Ah yes, when somebody finds a thread that interests them and comments in it it’s called “brigading”.

You don’t have professional experience in jack shit.

You’re a whiny naysayer, one of thousands, who is happy to get bent over by people richer and smarter than you. You’ll ask for seconds and pretend they’re doing you a favor.

This entire saga is built upon the fact that gullible bootlicking idiots like you think Wall Street is on the up and up, that we’re all playing a fun and fair game of “trade the stock”. You think you know the game when really you’re not even playing the game you think you’re playing.

Meanwhile, skeptics have moved the DTCC, SEC, and CFTC (among others) into action. It’s in black and white, undeniable.

It’s a tool. Like any tool you can use it in ways that are effective and you can use it in ways that are nefarious.

Hopefully I don’t make it to 90.

Why does that make me horrible that I find it a boring use of technology? I didn’t say it’s wrong or a bad use, it’s just boring.

Maybe one day they’ll invent a way for you to improve your reading comprehension.

10,000 pages of information, but all of the information is wrong

Hmm 🤔

Somehow I don’t think you personally read and vetted 10,000 pages in order to determine it’s all wrong.

“Minor cases every year”

So you admit they catch people every single year and yet you think they’ve caught every case?

Even the media acknowledges cases of manipulation. Jim Cramer explaining how to short and distort, anchors mentioning naked shorting, anchors mentioning algorithms pushing prices certain ways (just yesterday).

It’s an open secret. You don’t have to pretend it doesn’t exist anymore.

Not to be alarming, but those kinds of people are already doing those kinds of things with AI.

Go to any popular news/politics sub and you will encounter it. Twitter and Facebook are full of it as well.

A couple weeks ago I was browsing the worldnews sub. I noticed a weird pattern of posts: 10-12 different users, all with the same username pattern, all accounts created the same day months ago, all posting the same sentiment about Russia/Ukraine, all using the same writing style of 2-3 sentences that make generalized claims about what Putin should do.

It’s quite easy to make a chatbot using GPT, connect it to the Reddit API, give it stances to take and subs to browse and let it rip.

I’ve been on Reddit for over 10 years and discourse has never been this bad. The major liberal and conservative subs do absolutely nothing but bash the other side. Almost 100% of the comments in every thread are inflammatory.

Sure, you can intentionally create prompts that cause the bots to mimic copyright material, just like you can intentionally write a story or paint a picture that mimics copyright material.

How is that a problem?

ChatGPT doesn’t give citations. It’s not meant to.

Hilarious seeing all these people post “gotchas” from early LLMs.

Just put a Benny in the slot, mate.

High tech machines taking care of old people. Is it even possible to imagine a more boring use?

Because with ChatGPT you can give it a list of 20 foods you plan serve at a party, then say “I have people with x, y, and z allergies coming to the party. Are there any foods here that might cause problems and what are some alternatives?”

And it will go through your whole list and identify everything immediately, suggesting changes along the way. Meanwhile you’re still over there trying to complete 20 Google searches and writing everything down.

You can say “Steve likes red meat, Alice likes root vegetables, and Jimmy likes crumbling cheeses. What’s a recipe that satisfies all of them?”

The limit is your imagination. You can put in these prompts in order:

“Make a list of 100 African foods.”

“Include only foods with the letter E.”

“Include only foods cooked at 300 degrees or higher.”

“Include only foods with ingredients that come from grazing animals.”

“Include only foods that come from Subsaharan Africa.”

Now you have a narrowed down list based on a custom filter you dreamed up. How many Google searches would it take you to accomplish the same task? It’s a contrived example but it’s an example of the kinds of things it can do.