D&D General DMs Guild and DriveThruRPG ban AI written works, requires labels for AI generated art

[FrogReaver]

ChatGPT broke the Turing test — the race is on for new ways to assess AI

Large language models mimic human chatter, but scientists disagree on their ability to reason.

www.nature.com

LOL. Yes, that is clickbait.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

deleted

 

[Clint_L]

LOL. Yes, that is clickbait.

Nature. Clickbait. That's an unusual take.

Nature - Impact Factor (IF), Overall Ranking, Rating, h-index, Call For Paper, Publisher, ISSN, Scientific Journal Ranking (SJR), Abbreviation, other Important Details | Resurchify

Nature is a journal published by Nature Research. Check Nature Impact Factor, Overall Ranking, Rating, h-index, Call For Papers, Publisher, ISSN, Scientific Journal Ranking (SJR), Abbreviation, Acceptance Rate, Review Speed, Scope, Publication Fees, Submission Guidelines, other Important Details...

www.resurchify.com

Here's the TLDR: "Nature is currently ranked 12 out of 27955 Journals, Conferences, and Book Series in the latest ranking. Over the course of the last 9 years, this journal has experienced varying rankings, reaching its highest position of 12 in 2022 and its lowest position of 33 in 2019."

 

[FrogReaver]

Nature. Clickbait.

Nature - Impact Factor (IF), Overall Ranking, Rating, h-index, Call For Paper, Publisher, ISSN, Scientific Journal Ranking (SJR), Abbreviation, other Important Details | Resurchify

Nature is a journal published by Nature Research. Check Nature Impact Factor, Overall Ranking, Rating, h-index, Call For Papers, Publisher, ISSN, Scientific Journal Ranking (SJR), Abbreviation, Acceptance Rate, Review Speed, Scope, Publication Fees, Submission Guidelines, other Important Details...

www.resurchify.com

The headline is. And in the actual article body it isn't even an accurate claim.

 

[FrogReaver]

If you're actually going to debate in good faith, instead of making things up to support your argument, please do give us evidence.

Wait, are you accusing me of not debating in good faith?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

deleted

 

[FrogReaver]

I'm saying that saying people that don't agree with you fell for clickbait without doing anything to debunk the listed sources is not a sign of arguing in good faith. You can amend this mistake by actually arguing against our points, not just accusing things of being clickbait (or people of falling for it).

Serious question - what sources were listed before me doing that?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

deleted

 

[FrogReaver]

This video is a simplified explanation of how machine learning the process used to "teach" large language models, AI image generators, and other "AI". The Youtuber always does months of research into a topic before publishing a video, and has even made a video apologizing for a very minor mistake he made in one of his videos. I have never seen anything to suggest that they aren't a reliable source on this subject.

1. I may be wrong, but as far as i can tell that wasn't posted prior.
2. What point in the video do you think I disagree with so I know what the heck I'm listening for?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Edit: Nevermind. I misunderstood part of the discussion. Apologies, @FrogReaver.