I said I *didn't* think Taylor Lorenz was an industry shill but... wow... now I'm starting to rethink that.
-
I said I *didn't* think Taylor Lorenz was an industry shill but... wow... now I'm starting to rethink that.
You know I might be wrong, but what is wrong with watermarks?
@futurebird@sauropods.win I gotta watch the video first but what did she say that makes you think that?
-
I said I *didn't* think Taylor Lorenz was an industry shill but... wow... now I'm starting to rethink that.
You know I might be wrong, but what is wrong with watermarks?
@futurebird I've never gotten "shill" off her, but her leaning into youtuber stereotypes really put me off her reporting, which I used to quite enjoy.
-
@futurebird@sauropods.win I gotta watch the video first but what did she say that makes you think that?
The negative take on AI watermarking surprised me. That's all. Watermarks seem responsible?
-
@pbloem @futurebird all I hear is "Praise Sam & Dario" on repeat.
@jwcph @futurebird I know. It's not what I'm saying or thinking though.
-
Let me outline my understanding of "LLM Watermarking"
It is possible to embed special characters and patterns in the output of LLMs that would make text generated by these systems easier to reliably detect. This is mainly being done so that when LLMs scrape the web for new information they can avoid ingesting machine generated content.**
When you train an LLM on machine generated content it may lead to "model collapse."
**see next post for correction
@futurebird My (weak) understanding of AI Text watermarking is that they tweak the probabilities of words in certain positions so they're more likely to line up with complex watermark patterns.
I wonder if that will make their already noticeable style more or less recognizable.
I'll take their word for it that the watermark patterns aren't humanly detectable, but the fact that they're deliberately choosing slightly non-optimal words and phrases must have an effect?
-
I said I *didn't* think Taylor Lorenz was an industry shill but... wow... now I'm starting to rethink that.
You know I might be wrong, but what is wrong with watermarks?
@futurebird the comments. the comments are fucking beautiful
-
@futurebird My (weak) understanding of AI Text watermarking is that they tweak the probabilities of words in certain positions so they're more likely to line up with complex watermark patterns.
I wonder if that will make their already noticeable style more or less recognizable.
I'll take their word for it that the watermark patterns aren't humanly detectable, but the fact that they're deliberately choosing slightly non-optimal words and phrases must have an effect?
I'm confident they can do this without it having a noticeable impact. It's just garbage text, and it will still be garbage text even if you hide a pattern in it.
But a good thing about the issue of watermarking is perhaps talking about it might make people think about what other kinds of "weights" might apply to LLM generated content.
I have seen liberals and leftists say "Grok is that correct?" and I am baffled how they can be so critical of Mr. Musk but still trust his bot.
