The Onion has an AI policy.
-
Programming is out of scope for a "newspaper". A policy stating objects/activities the company doesn't engage in is just soapboxing. That's what articles are for, not policy pages.
@lxskllr @jalefkowit i disagree, it still makes a statement that genai is not ok for code
-
@jalefkowit Wow, so well said. I wish more organizations adopted this mindset
@Em0nM4stodon Yeah I'd much rather be reluctantly acknowledged by companies with principles like this, than all the alternatives we currently face.
-
The Onion has an AI policy. It is refreshingly clear
Well actually if a human can be replaced by AI, this probably means the human hasn't got a valuable skill.
I can say no AI can replace me to write the code I write, the blog posts I write, and the books I'm going to write.
This also true about many artists.
However, not many understand value of a good writing/art/code/video. Fewer who can tell if it's a good and creative one by looking at it.
So this is the real problem not just AI. But also the people who don't understand.
-
The Onion has an AI policy. It is refreshingly clear
@jalefkowit If only I could get the community theater to adopt a policy like this
-
The Onion has an AI policy. It is refreshingly clear
@jalefkowit
The Onion announces policy of not using Ai-generated content.
Bong hits 4 The Onion. -
@jalefkowit I don't really like this because 'an existential threat to the livelihood of creative professionals' can be read to mean that bullshit generators could actually substitute for the writers of The Onion. I'd much rather that they either omitted this part or explained it in a way that doesn't make that implication.
@david_chisnall @jalefkowit Which prompts the question in my mind: has an AI ever written something funny?
-
@jalefkowit If only I could get the community theater to adopt a policy like this
I bet showing them the onions policy makes it more likely they'll adopt something similar. A lot of people prefer making decisions by copying someone they respect's answers.
-
@jalefkowit I don't really like this because 'an existential threat to the livelihood of creative professionals' can be read to mean that bullshit generators could actually substitute for the writers of The Onion. I'd much rather that they either omitted this part or explained it in a way that doesn't make that implication.
@david_chisnall @jalefkowit as we've seen in the current state of the world, LLMs do not need to be *good* in order to harm entire industries. There's a lot of slop out there taking up space that human creativity used to fill.
-
I bet showing them the onions policy makes it more likely they'll adopt something similar. A lot of people prefer making decisions by copying someone they respect's answers.
@alienghic @jalefkowit I bet not. But I am going to keep being really annoying about this. I will send them everything I stumble upon like this, and I will bring it up at every board meeting until we do something
-
The Onion has an AI policy. It is refreshingly clear
I am a subscriber. They are Good People.
-
Well actually if a human can be replaced by AI, this probably means the human hasn't got a valuable skill.
I can say no AI can replace me to write the code I write, the blog posts I write, and the books I'm going to write.
This also true about many artists.
However, not many understand value of a good writing/art/code/video. Fewer who can tell if it's a good and creative one by looking at it.
So this is the real problem not just AI. But also the people who don't understand.
"if a human can be replaced by AI" is load-bearing here, and is mostly a marketing position from AI companies.
Additionally, every human creative endeavor is worthwhile, no matter the output's quality, which is arguably subjective. Generative AI just doesn't have a good place in human society.
-
The Onion has an AI policy. It is refreshingly clear
@jalefkowit Excellent news!!
-
@jalefkowit If only I could get the community theater to adopt a policy like this
@MLE_online@social.afront.org @jalefkowit@hachyderm.io I... a community theater that wants to use generative ML??
that is... depressing -
@MLE_online@social.afront.org @jalefkowit@hachyderm.io I... a community theater that wants to use generative ML??
that is... depressing@aud @jalefkowit Unfortunately, we've had some set designers who are very lazy (and lacking in talent) who have used AI in their sets. As a board member, I've been pushing us to come up with a policy. Some of the board members are on my side, but others are just too credulous and are completely wowed by the magic box. They don't want to agree to a policy that would cut off access to a miraculous tool
-
@jalefkowit ok but the onion should write a secondary funny AI policy because it'd be funny
@Mae @jalefkowit yeah, Roger Rabbit /toon "but only if it's funny"
-
The Onion has an AI policy. It is refreshingly clear
-
The Onion has an AI policy. It is refreshingly clear
@jalefkowit kind of a shame this has to be said in a media website
Like what's the point of running a media site if you aren't even making the media -
Actually, why shouldn't code belong to that list? Can't code also be creative?
@stardust yes it can, there are so many ways to obfuscate control flow and sophisticated patterns of mismanaging memory (including but not limited to: pretending automagical memory management works)
-
@jalefkowit I don't really like this because 'an existential threat to the livelihood of creative professionals' can be read to mean that bullshit generators could actually substitute for the writers of The Onion. I'd much rather that they either omitted this part or explained it in a way that doesn't make that implication.
@david_chisnall I think they describe the outcome (displaced workers) rather than the reason for this outcome (greedy bosses rather than output quality). As such, I think it’s fine. As an aside, you aren’t the first to jump to that conclusion this text doesn’t make, but that AI companies readily do in their marketing material. -
The Onion has an AI policy. It is refreshingly clear
@jalefkowit It's definitely better not to use it at all for all the ethics & resources reasons but I have to say there is one (1) exception where I'd love them doing it for the bit: Every time they write an article about anything to do with AI
