Shmong
153311
2578
29
Sauce:
1. https://www.sciencealert.com/the-science-of-affection-that-makes-cats-knead-you
2. https://www.sciencealert.com/is-lensa-ai-stealing-from-human-art-an-expert-explains-the-controversy
3. https://www.sciencealert.com/now-that-theyve-actually-looked-scientists-discover-snakes-have-two-clitorises
4. https://www.sciencealert.com/adverse-drug-reactions-overly-affect-women-the-reason-why-is-starting-to-emerge
5. https://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-discovered-something-morbidly-mysterious-at-the-bottom-of-the-indian-ocean
6. https://www.sciencealert.com/its-official-jwst-breaks-record-for-most-distant-galaxy-ever-detected
Kateness
Probably a shark dentist, I reckon.
lightfantasticem172
The 1st one is known already
CheeseGreaterGood
Yeah, but the earth is totally flat. Mainstream science is hiding the truth from you! /s
Clayman8
Ai "art" is bullshit and i hate it. Technolgically its amazing, but fuck is it crossing the line for us artists.
Lumpyguy
AI art not being theft is only a technical argument right now. It's immoral and unethical, and the laws will eventually reflect that too.
SnakuPlisskin
Exactly. Just like how when I learned to draw by emulating my favorite artists, it was unethical.
Sheldonian
I'm pretty sure the contrary will happen, it's just a tool and AI is here to stay, but yes in the meantime some rules and laws will come 1/
Sheldonian
About something like "fair use" maybe mandatory tagging as "Ai art", maybe audits on the database used, etc. 2/2
hellfirerains
The AI learning thing is kind of weird. AI learns just like us. We look at a painting, see a technique, and incorporate it into our style.
burquina
The thing with AI art is that it takes full pictures itself, it doesnt take bit and pieces; they are all in it's data, including -
burquina
copywritten art. Now imagine AI art being sold on after it was trained with art attached to, say, Disney, and it's not just 1 or 2 pics, -
burquina
AI is trained on databases of art scraped from thousands of different websites, even those that had art posted without permission. It opens-
burquina
A massive legal can of worms when it comes to IP stuff, not just individual artists who had their art copied without their consent or -
burquina
given any credit or pay. Musicians that sample other songs have to pay to use it or get sued, why not AI art?
Skizmo
the first one is old as fuck.
Hotsauceman
Where is the fusion?! I talked to a guy who helped build the diagnostic for it. He was tickled pink when he heard.
justhereforthemimes
I think that was in the last round up
generationsai
It wasn't
justhereforthemimes
Thanks for the fact check! I know I saw it in some roundup but must have been a different source
generationsai
Yup! With that said - Schmog should definitely make a whole weeks post dedicated to this
Crylz
Current ai.art generation being controversial ... it references already made art just like any learning artist
Anudderuser
True. Though I think the controversy is in ownership and copyright. AI generated art should probably be public domain always.
Crylz
Issue isn't with ai.art as tool for creation, issue is that this technology undermines art industry and we don't know how to react to it yet
avvar
Except many of these programs aren't learning so much as literally taking the art and putting it into new files. Complete w/ watermarks.
sweetandsmokey
#4 seems like an evidence to me … if we give kids meds depending on their body weight, why not continue with adult woman?
SizzlingColdness
This extrapolation based in bodyweight for children is also inadequate. PK/PD can be tricky.
SizzlingColdness
Here's an article as an example. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5155058/
sweetandsmokey
Thanks for this article I didn’t know.
RespiratoryRandy
Suddenly it's twice as good to be a Parseltongue
woobniggurath
Underrated comment
MemeusCalgar
thrashingcows
#5…I’m betting on a cephalopod who has taken to collecting these.
RemainAdequate
AI generated images are not art. They’re the output of advanced web scraping tech. Art is the product of human creativity and skill.
RemainAdequate
At made by humans inspires others to spend the time/effort to develop their own skills. AI does the opposite.
RemainAdequate
Why learn to drawe or paint or write when you can just type shit into a browser?
cosonfused
2. but it is. several artists have found their watermarks and signatures.
SnakuPlisskin
Sauce? I've seen some garbled remnants of signatures but no actual siggies or watermarks.
EndocrineResearcher
They're not "pre-clinical" if they're on men. Any medical trial with human subjects is a clinical trial. Unless you call male mice "men".
IdealTrajectory
Snakes get TWO clitorises?? -whispers- this is snakeshit
Redbeard54
ThatOtherGirlYouKnow
I'll get downvoted but: If AIs training on 'stolen' art is unethical, human artists are in trouble ... because that's how humans learn too.
ThatOtherGirlYouKnow
Art AIs are just tools for humans to use, like synths for musicians or power tools for carpenters.
ThatOtherGirlYouKnow
Tools are not ethical or unethical, what a person chooses to use them for and how they are used is what is ethical or not.
burquina
AI learns by having perfect copies of pictures in the databases to train from, humans might pick up a thing of 2 from using reference (and -
burquina
that includes referencing real objects/subjects/pictures, not just other artists), an artist wont be able to make perfect copy from memory-
burquina
AI takes a whole lot more and keeps the data it took forever. The problem arises when the databases used to train the AI use art from IPs -
burquina
without permission, since the data is scrapped from thousands of sites, even those that publish copywritten art without permission. it -
burquina
opens a MASSIVE can of worms when it comes to AI art getting sold that was train with these unethically sourced databases. It's like a -
siskoisbest
5 straight-up sounds like an SCP
Pishposhbingbong
The shark dentist?
DrPepper523
SciencePetsComputers
Does the Shark Punching Center know about this?
JPRiddles
A Scottish police?!
OffTheGrid99
Does your google not work?
SciencePetsComputers
https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-4666 here is seasonally appropriate SCP article to get you familiar with it.
1morebanforafreeshake
Snakes havin more sex organs
v
interesseret
Here come the snitties and the sclitties
TL10
Nimitz007
1morebanforafreeshake
LinemanMatt
#5 The only logical reason is that's the home of the shark tooth fairies.
sweetnaivety
or someone dumped their shark tooth collection?
TheChubbyDragon
Ai art is theft.
AllRicksAreJerrys
Very similar to sampling in music.
dreikommavierzehn
Things someone would say who might be personally affected by it and has little to no clue how the process of learning works
Sheldonian
It's a complex ethical and legal subject,to simplify it like that just hurts the argument
TheChubbyDragon
Imagine if there are eight cakes, and you took a piece from each and threw them together, and claimed you made the cake. That is Ai art
interesseret
You say that as if millions of copies of famous works of art don't exist. You say it like everyone isn't being inspired and copy from others
dreikommavierzehn
That's a derivative work and not a copyright violation. that is something you could actually sell legally. Not theft by definition
TheChubbyDragon
Art also is an intensive thing most people take ten years to be good at their chosen media
dreikommavierzehn
You have no grasp how much computing power is needed to train something like OpenAI. It would be interesting trying to find a rough estimate
dreikommavierzehn
how much time a human would take to learn that kind of information; but seriously speaking that's just not possible. And yes, it's an insane
Sheldonian
A new art piece made from pieces of 8 art pieces, sounds transformative. The topic of appropriation has been discussed and debated for 1/
Sheldonian
Many decades, again don't try to reduce a complex subject just because there's a new tool around. Some links in next reply 2/
Sheldonian
https://artincontext.org/appropriation-in-art/ https://www.thear">-in-art/">https://artincontext.org/appropriation-in-art/ https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2022/08/05/flair-use-copying-is-a-creative-act
EroticZombiePants
You did technically make that cake. It's like taking any group of things that exist and combining them into something of your own.
interesseret
Depends on the ai and what it builds upon.
hnngh
Glad to see snake clits made the list.
Munchman347
Males have a 'Hemi-penis', or dual shaft. The penis is just an enlarged Clitoris, so it's natural that there would be two...
hnngh
What about echinda vaginas?
TheBlueMuppet
Ahh, the Vachidnia.
TK421isAFK
Yes, so much more important than the first successful fusion reaction, or grammar (in the case of the JWST sentence - it *did* reach us). /s
RevolutionOnHerLips
This list is not ranked. It's just a list. Feel free to make your own post where you rank information based on importance.
RevolutionOnHerLips
And I mean that literally. A ranked list would be cool, because I have cognitive and executive function issues.
TK421isAFK
Fair enough. I'm probably too lazy to make one, though.
nurmich
If AI using other people's work to learn isn't stealing then I want 100% free digital music.
phoenix071
Humans use other people's art to learn too though
avvar
But if they're literally taking the orig art and putting into INTO their own (as many of these AI programs are), then it is still stealing.
phoenix071
I agree
dreikommavierzehn
Yes, that's why IP laws include a discussion of what is considered a derivative and what isn't.
DVSBSTrD
*AI generated digital music
dreikommavierzehn
Seeing how the music industry was one of the most successful parasites in IP laws we can be sure this particular kind of AI won't happen
DVSBSTrD
My sweet summer child.
dreikommavierzehn
Oh it will be developed and it could have great appliances. But we will also see extremely restricting laws about it the day after
NotTinyPancakes
IDK kids often elarn to draw lookign at other peroples work i figured the ai was doing the same more or less
NotTinyPancakes
unles sits just straight ripping parts of their wrk and puttign it into its own
avvar
It is. Artists have found their watermarks and signatures on AI 'art'.
GodEmperorOfImgur
That has mostly happened with LensaAI ... and mostly, it's random words, cause the AI doesn't know what a signature is.
GodEmperorOfImgur
In fact, mostly, it's not even words, it's just random squiggles that sorta look like a signature. Thinking it includes whole ass 1/2
GodEmperorOfImgur
signature, just means you don't know how AI art is generated. 2/2
Zreen
#6 i mean... it still took that long for that light to reach us
mydakotaandanamaybegonebutnotforgotten
The conservative right will claim that this false as they say the universe is only 4,000 years old according to the Bible.
Zreen
Those same conservatives would also claim that early bible ages of people years passed differently so 4000 could equal 14b years
Zreen
or something
drunkcat
How is it technically not stealing?
DeaconJon
Because they said so.
dreikommavierzehn
I started learning guitar a couple of years ago. To date I have not played a single song of my own composition, but I see the patterns and
dreikommavierzehn
same repeating notes all the time. I could easily derive my own songs from that. That's not stealing, that's just the artistic process
drunkcat
Cool, but "AI" in this case isn't AI, it's machine learning. Learning how to bake make its stolen input. It's glorified tracing.
asm80dfa8sdfj
Machine learning is modeled after the way humans learn, you know that right?
drunkcat
Yes.
dreikommavierzehn
Machine learning, by definition, is AI.
drunkcat
Now it is, in the same way literally by definition means figuratively.
dreikommavierzehn
a very simple one; one that isn't very original and probably won't have much success. But almost all popular songs use the same set of notes
dreikommavierzehn
in a couple of same repeating patterns. That's not that original either yet we've done so for a couple hundred years; quite successfully
drunkcat
Notes you still have to pay for, did you think tab books are just got decoration?
dreikommavierzehn
I don't really buy books. I look up whatever someone writes online be it tabs or notes. Or use piano notes and transpose them. Or just watch
frizzyhairdontcare
Why are most pre-clinical trials done on men??? Wouldn’t it make sense to make it an even 50/50?!? It’s 2022 how is this even still a thing
SizzlingColdness
As someone studying the field, the tests were originally performed on men because women are more susceptible for sex organ related injuries
SizzlingColdness
However, the differences between men and woman have been known for a long time, yet there is no large change seen.
SizzlingColdness
I attribute this to a lack of recognition from health authorities and probably it being silenced by rich stakeholders
asm80dfa8sdfj
People need to volunteer.
zebrasally3
Two words: “women’s hormones”. Everyone knows those hormones are deceptive & overly emotional. Unlike testosterone which never ever changes.
Sheldonian
The point is that in the past has been like that, and usually if you're a student you work with what you get and usually you'll work with 1/
Sheldonian
Stablished models, but yes, there's everyday new evidence of the importance of getting more representative samples, in this case about 2/
Sheldonian
Testing in a significant amount of female models (which includes rats and cells), the issueis that this isn't the only problem, most 3/
Sheldonian
Are in white males, so there's a necessity around the world to make the same tests with local populations because we still don't know what4/
Sheldonian
Results can really be transferred to every human and which ones will depend more on other traits like gender and ethnicity. A lot of work 5/
MickeyCallahan
They found 750 shark teeth. To put that in perspective, that's roughly three sharks' worth.
WithCheese
for #5 I’d like to believe that since modern octopuses pile up shells and fish bones outside of their den, there was a prehistoric mega…
WithCheese
octopus that preyed on sharks and other creatures of the time. IIRC there’s a plesiosaur graveyard in Nevada with a similar hypothesis
MrPowPow
What if the edges of our universe don’t actually move and the universe is expanding in on itself without its boundaries actually moving.
SciencePetsComputers
I think the boundary of the universe is basically defined by what is not pure vacuum/truly empty space.
dycedycedyce
i came up with The Sweater Theory to explain that! lol
LongCommentChainAppreciator
Shrinking in on itself you mean? Kinda hard to be expanding and not doing so outward
beoluves
If you start with the assumption that space is finite though...
[deleted]
[deleted]
rbudrick
There is no evidence of it wrapping around. All evidence points to the universe being flat, not curved.
Justzissguy
So in relation to the overall size of the universe we’re shrinking…I am in just the right headspace 4 this.
JPRiddles
What? How are we expanding "in"?
kaldaze
Like a bubble wand. The edges are fixed around the outside but the middle bubble expands.
cosonfused
shrinking
eightyearplan
light would get from A to B faster. it doesn't. https://phys.org/news/2015-02-universe.html
beoluves
Would the scale of things make it a "not yet observable" case?
zimirken
No its quite observable.
beoluves
Well, if that's the case, then that's that
rbudrick
It actually started expanding faster several billion years ago and no one knows why.
dreikommavierzehn
First time I hear this; got any more to read about it?
rbudrick
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerating_expansion_of_the_universe
MrPowPow
I don’t mean shrinking, I mean expanding without our edges moving. Unchanging from an outside perspective but growing to us. It defines 1/2
MrPowPow
Logic as we understand it, but at these scales our logic is basically worthless. Just random thought. Not a theory.
KennyBlankenshipandVicRomano
So what happens to matter & radiation (?, x, UV, visible, IR, radio waves) that reach the edge? Annihilation? They turn around & come back?
MrPowPow
For anyone inside the universe there is functionally no edge. Like trying to walk off the edge of the earth you just keep going and going.
dreikommavierzehn
Another hard to answer question. We don't know for certain how many (room) dimensions exist or what the geometry of our universe really
dreikommavierzehn
looks like. "bouncing off the edge" is not so unlikely if you consider that our 3D perception of the universe is just a projection.
TheOnlyCanadianWhoDoesNotLikeHockey
Also fusion. That was a good one
BORGALOOGIE
Technicality: I think that was over a week ago.
needtogetcreative
That was all hype, still a good step forward.
ringwr8th
Shocking how little press this got.
algavinn
Defintiely a step forward. Though the papers have misrepresented it as the fusion created more energy than the laser itself BUT the /2
algavinn
power required to create the laser was muuuuch more than what's generated due to very low efficiency of return. We need laser advances too.
algavinn
But still a big step forward.
NonstopRampage
I was expecting more dragon ball in the replies ?
080080
"controlled" fusion. we've had the hydrogen bomb for awhile now.
AnythingMuchShorter
You mean the fusion where all those teeth were from thousands of sharks fusing into one megashark?
woobniggurath
Let me know when they include the gigawatts used to just get the facility up and running in their calculations.
mrtweeter04
Fusion? Something new there?
TheOnlyCanadianWhoDoesNotLikeHockey
https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/fusion-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-rcna61326
NairouTryyshokk
Real engineering did a video on a new type as opposed to the tokamak design that solves some of the issues it had and it seems promising.
NairouTryyshokk
Tokamak heats water to run a turbine, this one uses magnetic fields to generate a charge.
NairouTryyshokk
https://youtu.be/_bDXXWQxK38
DarkSock
They FINALLY had success using the protocols for Bofor-D.
PieceOfCake1
3KnucklesDeep
The perpetual motion machine is broken. It keeps speeding up.
madelinewuntch
It's a net gain in energy output vs input. But the articles cleverly don't mention some important factors like actual energy used to power
SoraHjort
tl;dr: first time they got more energy out than they put in. However the method is not one that is feasible for large scale use. But it >
SoraHjort
does make it easier to test things for the proper reactors being designed.
lonelyrangerofthedreams
They got higher Qplasma level positive, not Qtotal. Just a scientific experiment went better than others. Not scalable, not convenient
SoraHjort
There's other reasons why it can't be scaled up nor useful for power gen, such as requiring lithium to make the hydrogen isotope Tritium. >
SoraHjort
The EM containment style of reactors should theoretically breed tritium without lithium, after the initial batches to get them started. >
BatmanAndCradleRobin
Not really it worked but not a viable solution for actual production
Waidonut
Yet.
Imademyselfsquirtle
Republican. Coal energy!
JimFromMarketing
Omg stfu seriously, it's a huge frickin deal
madelinewuntch
Dude it's a small step. But a step nonetheless https://youtu.be/1g_A5tEApa0
WeAreAllStoriesInTheEnd
But a breakthrough and a step in the direction of clean energy
BatmanAndCradleRobin
Not when the method to achieve it has no possibility of large scale energy production.
WeAreAllStoriesInTheEnd
At this point in time, no. But it will hopefully lead to advances that will allow for commercial production. Baby steps.
SciencePetsComputers
it like a proof of concept prototype, the point is to prove something can happen, not to make it happen well.
TheOnlyCanadianWhoDoesNotLikeHockey
Net energy gain from a man-made fusion reactor for the first time
mrtweeter04
So we are still about 30years off :(
NoodlesWthADHD
Realistically yes, but now we know we can do it and how to go about doing it! It's a huge leap forward!
monkeydwolfwood
And what's crazy is the lasers were only working at something like 1% efficiency
JimFromMarketing
WHAT!???? ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS?! THAT'S ABSOLUTELY INSANE HOW DID I NOT KNOW THIS.
kepattRunner
I don’t get into this side of science but I am so happy that you are so excited about finding this out that I’m smiling and nodding for you
kepattRunner
JimFromMarketing
Buddy I'VE BEEN SHITTING MYSELF, this is absolutely BANANA PANTS that everyone's talking about fucking Twitter instead of this
SciencePetsComputers
It's just technical gain. They are only counting the actual power of the laser beam itself, not the real power to make the laser beam.
SoraHjort
The method used won't even feasible, it was by super heating a canister, instead of the electromagnetic containment that will be feasible.
Targe0
It was the power needed to trigger the fusion of the fuel using the lasers. But not the power for the lasers themselves.
Sheldonian
Net energy technically (which does matter a lot in this case) but not net energy for the whole system
weirdgur
My takeaway was, we can redirect renewable energy and storage to generate laser and we’d arrive at net gains (in access) to energy.
C141Clay
This was a test generating a large net energy output/gain. More than just breaking even or a little positive. So pretty major news.
SwagicalYololord
As a whole the facility put in 300 MJ to create the 2 MJ that went into the reaction. Not great.
Gaelwyn
Yes but still less energy than what was needed to run the lasers. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-63950962
AceOfShovels
It was a 50% gain if I recall, not huge but still incredible
JimFromMarketing
Please make a post on this and spread awareness
TerryToucan
Good to be able to diminish what is quite a significant step, is it?
Sheldonian
When the media makes click baity remarks that aren't factually correct about a scientific topic it's important to clarify it, specially for1
WeaponizedJerk
They’re not trying to diminish it, they’re being factually correct.