The Nature Study Linked In The Above Post Could, Kind Of, Be Read As Suggesting That The Increasing Amount

The Nature study linked in the above post could, kind of, be read as suggesting that the increasing amount of AI generated content on the internet may wind up with AI killing itself, as the Forbes article suggests was the takeaway from the AWS study.

Except really, the Nature study is just saying that AI training sets are starting to include more and more AI-generated content, which leads to "recursive training" where the AI models wind up being trained on their own output, and this in turn causes irreversible changes to future AI models in a direction away from similarity to human-generated content.

The AWS study, meanwhile, found that, "57.1% of all sentences come from multi-way parallel tuples." Which means, in this context, that 57.1% of sentences in their data set had been translated more than twice.

A news site called WindowsCentral just posted a headline: "57% of all content on the web is AI-generated."

They're misquoting a Forbes article that said, "57% of all text-based content on the web is AI-generated."

Which itself was also a misquote of a study saying "57% of all text translations on the web are machine generated."

Figured I should give everyone a heads up

for all the "OMG dead Internet theory is real!" posting coming up.

It was definitely an older fandom thing, but not a universal thing. I'd honestly wondered if the non-universal usage was why it dropped out of common usage, as the internet became more ubiquitous, more people got into fandom, and some terms/trends just didn't manage to hang around well enough with the influx of new people for any significant number of said new people to learn about them.

It probably did also fall out of fashion with the rise of, "every gay couple switches exactly 50% of the time or else you're being homophobic," mindset that became unfortunately common for a while, though. While I hope fandom might be moving towards a healthier middle ground - more genuine understanding that plenty of gay couples switch, personality outside the bedroom doesn't determine preferences inside the bedroom, and some people do in fact have hard preferences on who tops/bottoms for themselves and/or the fiction they want to read for horny reasons, and none of those things have to contradict each other - I can certainly see how the rise of purity culture nonsense alongside the overcorrecting of, "every gay couple has a top and a bottom who never switch," into, "no gay couple has ever existed wherin both partners have strong, complementary preferences for either topping or bottoming all (or nearly all) the time," might have helped suppress a fandom norm that was all about specifying which half of your ship took dick up the ass and which half did not.

learned a few months ago that apparently the name position in ship names indicates who's top/bottom???? i thought, okay that's probably a new thing but now i'm wondering......

is this a new thing or have i actually missed a crucial naming convention for ships for more than a decade

Thinking about The Angry Black Girl and her Monster, again, and how one of the pure storytelling elements I appreciated the most was their willingness to lean on the framework already provided by Frankenstein to avoid rehashing a story about the 'monster' that most of their audience would already know.

Because they didn't rehash the part of the story that wasn't really changed from the original (the part where the 'monster' is really just scared, lost, and reacting to other peoples' fear and violence, rather than being inherently a violent monster), it gave the movie more space to focus instead on the part of the movie they changed (turning Victor Frankenstein the generic old white guy mad scientist into Vicaria Frankenstein, the brilliant young black girl science prodigy who is also deeply traumatized by the systemic marginalization and violence that she and her community face because of the color of their skin and by the personal losses she has faced as a result of systemic violence).

The fact that we could lean on the original Frankenstein narrative for characterization of her brother means that the story could craft a much deeper and tighter narrative around Vicaria, and I just -

This is what remakes and adaptations should be! Not an ever so slightly altered copy/paste of the original with updated CGI or some modern references, but a way to use the original story as a framework/jumping off point to tell a new story with some of the groundwork already laid.

“This country was founded by a group of slave owners who told us that all men are created equal. To my mind, that is what’s known as being stunningly and embarrassingly full of shit.” - George Carlin

…PolitiFact going through history to fact check this guy was like that time CNN went through history to dig up dirt on Bernie, and all they found were videos of him planting trees, and telling kids that racism is bad.

Honestly, hateposting about one's favorite worst fictional characters should come back and replace anti nonsense more. Shamelessly hating on the fictional characters who did terrible things in canon, or mildly bad but extremely annoying things in canon, or even just hit on your personal squick(s) in canon, can make for great catharsis, without all the stress of moralizing other people's opinions.

No hate for hating fiction, only hate for using personal opinions about fiction to decide whether or not other people are allowed to be Good People based on how closely they align to the things that the loudest self-defined Good Person in the room has chosen to like.

Sometimes I need to focus more on posting about things that bring me joy.

Other times I need to accept that it does in fact bring me joy to hatepost about the Cattons from Saltburn, because they are terrible fictional people who I love to hate.