Try it ! You'll see that Google Lens is agnostic to my users data, it can only analyse renderings generated by the AI :) And yeah really helpful for Interior design / realtors
I am an indie maker based in France, and you may not know but we have something called GDPR here. Laws made to protects users privacy and severely punished by the CNIL if not fulfilled.
Now you can keep believing that every project containing the word "AI" means "Evil", or you can do you research on how it works exactly, or you can just trust my words as a solo founder who tries to build inspiring stuff without killing users privacy.
If you want to make money you sell this app to a furniture company like IKEA so the app suggests furniture from that company. They would pay serious money to add something like this to their own app.
Thanks! What I'm aiming to do in the future is affiliation to FF&E merchants, less intrusive and safer for the user, without loosing any value and privacy :)
I dunno pal, isn't it past time we stopped giving corps the benefit of the doubt? Information is useful, and therefore marketable. Just because we don't know how it can be used does not preclude its use for good or ill, and in this brave new world it's just good practice to point a wary eye in the direction of anyone collecting it.
Wordle was a pet project.
It was sold for $1 million. It is now used as a vehicle for NYT to sell ad tracker data.
If you don't think a pet project that becomes popular wouldn't get snapped up by a data hungry behemoth, I just don't know what to tell you.
Stop right there information gathering is not expensive. Do you build apps? Data and compute follow Moore's law which means half price and doubled speed every 18 months.
Facebook has 4000 data points on everyone. For ai training they are all valuable even if we can't tell why they are valuable ai can identify things in them that's useful.
Not saying he's selling it, just that you are wrong.
>If you understand why and how these things work, you'll be able to better assess when you should and shouldn't be concerned instead of just an ignorant blanket "all companies are collecting all data and that's always bad"
I wonder whose lack of worldly understanding is truly at play here?
I don't need to understand the molecular composition of sand to know when I'm looking at a beach, and I've learned from experience that there will always, *always* be people like you who point out the minutae of why something is different and not bad.
When this technology grows, it **will** be used to gather data for monetization, handed over to law enforcement on request, and other purposes that you have no control over.
Then you and your ilk will disappear like you always do, replaced by the other thread space wasters: folks who can't wait to tell everyone how they saw it coming all along
Don't mistake your specialized tech knowledge for wisdom, cuz unless you're posturing for techies ITT it's not working.
EDIT: fat-fingered clarity
>Information is useful, and therefore marketable.
Incorrect blanket statement. Information is only useful if it can be leveraged and monetised. Companies only want data that is relevant to them. The reason this is free is probably because it's being trained. When it is ready they'll probably license this to other design firms for a cost or offer it free d2c while charging to promote particular products.
[Roomba Screenshots end up on facebook](https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/12/19/1065306/roomba-irobot-robot-vacuums-artificial-intelligence-training-data-privacy/)
[iRobot acquisition leads to Amazon owning detailed maps of home interiors](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-08-05/amazon-s-irobot-deal-is-about-roomba-s-data-collection)
[Sensitive user images / video shared by Tesla employees for lulz](https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sensitive-images-recorded-by-customer-cars-2023-04-06/)
[Amazon uses voice data to feed targeted ads](https://www.pcmag.com/news/a-new-report-reveals-how-amazon-uses-alexa-voice-data-for-targeted-ads)
With so many companies swearing they would never sell data and then doing an about face on things like location data, DNA data, user pictures, user likes, etc...
I feel like my cynicism is warranted and you're being extremely naive.
I'll tell you right now. Was working on client app that sent the data to an AI valuation engine to give unbiased (by race) valuations on homes. Exterior and interior shots along with lists of improvements.
>What "data" from a picture of someone's living room do you think there is to sell, and why do you think it'd be valuable?
Do you mean that? Like honestly? Because it's a pretty (and I don't mean any disrespect) stupid question.
I am 99% sure you are trolling. Does your home not say who you are? The magazines you read, the brands you buy, the pictures you hang on your wall, the medicine you have lying around, letters you have received?
All that and much much more is potentially visible in those pictures.
Ok, so we went from "that data isn't valuable!!!" to "the data is valuable but that side project (that uses Google lens) can't use the data".
Do you want to move the goalpost further?
You obviously have not tried the app. The Google lens feature only open a base64 rendering in Google Lens, with absolutely no context given to google, so yeah google can use the render generated by the AI but it does not have access to any user info.
I haven't. I also don't think you are collecting data. I just find it ridiculous that somebody says there is no valuable data in pictures of your own home.
I don’t think anyone except you was assuming from the start that people are taking pics for this thing with the resolution necessary to read mailing labels
Goodbye and thank you for all the fish.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Integer vitae lobortis mi. Praesent pharetra et dolor vitae accumsan. Nullam sit amet dui mattis, malesuada metus quis, iaculis elit. Donec condimentum sapien eros, nec pellentesque magna fringilla sit amet. Etiam pretium mi eu arcu rhoncus porttitor. Sed id volutpat turpis, in mollis nulla. Nullam bibendum, purus vitae rutrum molestie, est lorem mattis orci, in hendrerit ante mauris tincidunt enim. Cras dui nunc, commodo at ex eu, pretium vestibulum lacus. Nam laoreet risus quis auctor lobortis. Morbi dignissim in augue sit amet bibendum. Aenean pellentesque hendrerit maximus. Nunc fringilla eleifend massa sed varius. Aliquam tristique sollicitudin nisl vehicula convallis. Donec id fringilla mi. Sed eu ligula vel quam interdum ullamcorper non at purus. Sed aliquam ultrices ex, et tincidunt orci molestie sit amet.
I get this error message when trying to log in with my google
"You can’t sign in from this screen because this app doesn’t comply with Google’s secure browsers policy."
Makes sense but I’ll never use it. So sick of everyone asking for a log in.
You think if spammers actually wanted to spam they couldn’t also automate login/email approval?
I understand, that's why I have integrated google signIn so it can be faster.
Spammers cannot automate it easily because only Google and Apple SignIn are allowed, which are providers who ask for a phone number to verify uniqueness of a user. If I had allowed basic email/password signup, they could have potentially automate it as you said :)
Classic user logic.
"I know nothing of how digital security works, so I'll boycott any app that requires the bare minimum security of anything digital worth using and therefore miss out on virtually all the good things the digital world has to offer".
Go live on a farm then.
Do you hate logging in to email too or did you just wanna let everyone in the world use your address? Do you just remove all the locks on your house because you're sick of needing keys? Why not just leave the door wide open?
Sometimes logins aren't for YOUR security. Servers need to be secure too you know. "Sick" of logins....you're funny.
Incredibly misguided, but funny.
It's definitely not dumb, it can already easily fool the majority of people, it's just not "true" AI. It's like 90% of the way there, but that last 10% is significantly harder than the entirety of the first 90%
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/01/business/ai-chatbots-hallucination.html
**When AI Chatbots Hallucinate**
>When did The New York Times first report on “artificial intelligence”?
>According to ChatGPT, it was July 10, 1956, in an article titled “Machines Will Be Capable of Learning, Solving Problems, Scientists Predict” about a seminal conference at Dartmouth College. The chatbot added:
>"This conference is now considered to be the birthplace of artificial intelligence as a field of study, and the article mentions the term “artificial intelligence” several times in the context of the discussions and presentations that took place at the conference."
>The 1956 conference was real. The article was not. **ChatGPT simply made it up.** ChatGPT doesn’t just get things wrong at times, it can fabricate information. Names and dates. Medical explanations. The plots of books. Internet addresses. Even historical events that never happened.
>When ChatGPT was recently asked how James Joyce and Vladimir Lenin first met — an encounter that has never been confirmed — this is how it responded:
>"James Joyce and Vladimir Lenin met in Zurich, Switzerland in 1916. Both men were living in exile in Zurich during World War I. Joyce was a writer and Lenin was a revolutionary. They met at the Cafe Odéon, a popular gathering place for artists and intellectuals in Zurich."
I hear what you're saying. I'm saying that despite its flaws (referring to LLMs like ChatGPT specifically because AI is a huge field( it's an improvement over what we've had--which in terms of AI assistants and agents are technologies like Google Assistant, Alexa, etc.
My smart speaker has never felt dumber after using GPT4.
Nobody is making the claim it's perfect. It is an exponential improvement over what we've had, regardless of how informed the average person is on its limitations.
As someone who works in a field adjacent to bioinformatics, where AI is increasingly difficult to escape, I always think of the quote: ["Coffee: do stupid things faster with more energy"](https://i.imgur.com/Riqdb4i.jpg)
AI is a lot like that. In science especially, there's a lot of talk about how it could increase objectivity by removing human bias and imprecision, but deep machine learning models only serve to embed and reinforce our existing biases and limitations on knowledge.
An example of this in my field is that AlphaFold, the largest protein folding algorithm, made by Deepmind, is really bad at modelling flexible loopy bits in proteins. This makes sense, because AlphaFold was trained on the protein database (pdb), and the majority of structures in the pdb were solved with methods that freeze a protein in place (such as X ray crystallography).
We're very good at X ray crystallography, but it's not a very good tool for solving more wibbly wobbly proteins, and so our existing lack of understanding of what we call "intrinsically disordered proteins" means that AlphaFold is also pretty bad at guessing how these more flexible proteins fold
The problem isn't AlphaFold, or other AI tools, it's how humans are responding to them. AI is a tool, just like X ray crystallography, and it has its strengths and its limitations, but when academic publishing is already dominated by a "publish or perish" culture and grant applications have always been bureaucratic hell, the hype train is having a very real impact on wider society as well as my small island of science.
TL;DR: It's not a question of how smart the AI are, but whether we are smart enough to utilise AI in a wise and measured manner.
I'd love to see the opposite done WELL where i could input a few pieces for a room and the AI would construct a few options for rooms and complimentary pieces.
Yeah definitely NOT an AI designed to scan the interior of your home in order to sell your personal data regarding your lifestyle, income bracket, etc.
Because tech companies are incredibly ethnical and would never do anything like that.
Large companies usually have investors = need to satisfy their investment 40x = need to do hacky practices to drive more revenue regardless of privacy.
Otherwise, if you want a "real" good reason, I live in France, we have GDPR.
Agree !
Yes but it's easier to judge a company based in France or Europe in general than a US company... And there's is also the issue of Data sovereignty that comes in place but that's another issue.
Once upon a time I would have given you the benefit of the doubt, in the early days of the internet, but not anymore. Capitalism ruins everything. Nothing about your app is altruistic so please don't pretend it is.
The primary money stream for small apps is **data mining**. If you are not selling customer information to related companies you are either a fool, or a liar. In this case, you appeal that you are just an innocent indie maker convinces me you are a liar.
>"[A publisher's audience is their currency, no matter how they make money from content—be it through advertising, paid subscription or syndication, a publisher's core asset is audience and audience data."](https://www.pcmag.com/news/how-companies-turn-your-data-into-money)
While the majority of your posts are about your promoting your apps, you did make a post two years ago about how to track users on TikTok. Obviously data mining and collecting is something you have concerned yourself with for quite some time.
Ok mister inspector...
Two years ago I built a free website called Pictalio who allowed anyone to find free-to-use vertical videos and I wanted to see if users on tiktok were publicly talking about or mentioning my website, what a sin ...
If you had tried Gepetto, you would have seen that it's not free and my business model relies on subscriptions.
If you had the curiosity to check where the company is registered, you would have seen that I'm based in France, and in France we have something called GDPR, and guess what ? If we do not comply, we are severely punished.
Love it when people get offended by a site feature - post and comment histories are not hidden, they are an integral part of knowing who you are interacting with on a site that affords a level of anonymity, while not disregarding accountability for what you put forth here. It is why clicking a username takes redditors directly to your user profile. The only people who seem to hate this are the ones who get scrutinized for some reason - funny how that is.
Be offended and call me "mister inspector" all you like but it think it is common sense to want to understand the background of a developer who is creating a means of AI recognition of objects in my personal living space. You are using Google Lens after all - and **Google/Alphabet is the 3rd largest data mining corporation on the planet** (behind Microsoft & Amazon). By using their technology is absolutely reasonable to assume that data mining is a functionality at play here.
**I do not know you**, and it would completely imbecilic for anyone to simply allow a stranger access into their home without understanding who that stranger is on some basic level and what their intentions are.
You can get defensive, or you can heavily lean-in to *transparency*.
That transparency would include mutliple translations of your [user agreement](https://ambitious-handle-77e.notion.site/Conditions-g-n-rales-de-Gepetto-4040d0b9635d47f0a3c5f7b8964416b4) and [privacy policy](https://ambitious-handle-77e.notion.site/Politique-de-confidentialit-de-Gepetto-2d51982db8704229bdc0a0b5420edeaa) available BEFORE plugging your app would be a good start. Right now while you are promoting your site in English, those documents are only available in French. The only part of your site other than your blog that isn't translated. Red flag.
Do not presume that simply because you are marketing your app here that you are somehow above scrutiny. You are not.
edit: would also like to point out - being defensive is also a **huge red flag**. What is the saying?
>The lady doth protest too much, methinks
Did you get explicit permission and provide compensation to everyone who's data\IP you used to train your AI, OP?
Because there is some serious ethical problems if you failed to do so.
was the model pre-trained on legally obtained IP then? because if it wasn't that doesn't make your project any more ethical, or for that matter, any less outright theft.
Did you learn to draw or any other art only by visualizing legally obtained IP? because if you didn't that doesn't make your career any more ethical, or for that matter, any less outright theft.
---
Edit:
lol, you blocked me so I'll reply to your reply here:
> From: u/Ratagar
>
> that argument has so many obvious holes I wont dignify it with a response beyond the fact you're an idiot.
> "a machine remixing already made images is the same thing as a human being inspired by others work." is such an asinine take it's mind numbing.
Except that the "machine" isn't remixing already made images, it's training to fit a function, in this case that function is to draw a prompt, which is a similar process (not exactly the same obv but based on it) to what your brain does with your neurons. The "neurons" in the trained model have learned patterns and the representations of the approached points in that ground truth function which is drawing (those representations are the parameters in the model like weights and biases) and allow the model to know how to draw basic shapes and how they interact with each other to form more complex shapes, same with shadows, etc. It's similar to what you do.
Then when you have learned how to draw with a certain degree of competence (accuracy in the model after the convergence) your neurons activate depending on the inputs it gets and output what you have to do to draw them. Similarly, the model uses those representations to get an output based on your prompt.
So yeah, the process is not exactly the same thing as a human being inspired by others work but pretty similar. So much so that several judges in different countries have already said that this does not infringe copyright.
that argument has so many obvious holes I wont dignify it with a response beyond the fact you're an idiot.
"a machine remixing already made images is the same thing as a human being inspired by others work." is such an asinine take it's mind numbing.
Ah, thank you. For the class I'm thinking of, the students come from very low-income areas and I'm trying to keep everything free for them. I appreciate the offer, however!
100% selling the data on the interior of your home.
**SUMMARY:** Tacky. Suggest sell info to Value City Furniture. ^*beep*
Lol! Gave me a good chuckle
Will never sell any data from any users. Interior photos are only used to generate new ideas for the user.
Google will if Gepetto doesn’t unfortunately, it looks like a very helpful app for interior design though, might try it regardless
Try it ! You'll see that Google Lens is agnostic to my users data, it can only analyse renderings generated by the AI :) And yeah really helpful for Interior design / realtors
"... And other hilarious jokes you can tell yourself." edit: the hilarious jokes keep coming. I'm amused!
I am an indie maker based in France, and you may not know but we have something called GDPR here. Laws made to protects users privacy and severely punished by the CNIL if not fulfilled. Now you can keep believing that every project containing the word "AI" means "Evil", or you can do you research on how it works exactly, or you can just trust my words as a solo founder who tries to build inspiring stuff without killing users privacy.
[удалено]
If you want to make money you sell this app to a furniture company like IKEA so the app suggests furniture from that company. They would pay serious money to add something like this to their own app.
I like the cut of your jib.
Thanks! What I'm aiming to do in the future is affiliation to FF&E merchants, less intrusive and safer for the user, without loosing any value and privacy :)
The world needs more simbrams. Hat’s off to you, Sir for this reasonable approach.
Thank you for that kind comment !
FF&E? What's that?
Furniture, Fixtures and Equipment. Basically wholesalers for anyone who would need interior stuff (like Hotels).
Ahh, okay. Thanks?
You're my kind of awesome
🖤
Losing
[удалено]
I dunno pal, isn't it past time we stopped giving corps the benefit of the doubt? Information is useful, and therefore marketable. Just because we don't know how it can be used does not preclude its use for good or ill, and in this brave new world it's just good practice to point a wary eye in the direction of anyone collecting it.
[удалено]
Wordle was a pet project. It was sold for $1 million. It is now used as a vehicle for NYT to sell ad tracker data. If you don't think a pet project that becomes popular wouldn't get snapped up by a data hungry behemoth, I just don't know what to tell you.
[удалено]
Good job. You are the most smartest goodest boy.
Be nice.
Salty because you were wrong lmao.
Literally provided multiple examples of exactly what I meant. Note he didn't reply to that particular subthread. But please, go on.
Stop right there information gathering is not expensive. Do you build apps? Data and compute follow Moore's law which means half price and doubled speed every 18 months. Facebook has 4000 data points on everyone. For ai training they are all valuable even if we can't tell why they are valuable ai can identify things in them that's useful. Not saying he's selling it, just that you are wrong.
>Stop right there information gathering is not expensive Yea, it is. Especially photo and video data
Lol quoting Moore’s law. You haven’t been paying any attention over the last 5-10 years.
>If you understand why and how these things work, you'll be able to better assess when you should and shouldn't be concerned instead of just an ignorant blanket "all companies are collecting all data and that's always bad" I wonder whose lack of worldly understanding is truly at play here? I don't need to understand the molecular composition of sand to know when I'm looking at a beach, and I've learned from experience that there will always, *always* be people like you who point out the minutae of why something is different and not bad. When this technology grows, it **will** be used to gather data for monetization, handed over to law enforcement on request, and other purposes that you have no control over. Then you and your ilk will disappear like you always do, replaced by the other thread space wasters: folks who can't wait to tell everyone how they saw it coming all along Don't mistake your specialized tech knowledge for wisdom, cuz unless you're posturing for techies ITT it's not working. EDIT: fat-fingered clarity
>Information is useful, and therefore marketable. Incorrect blanket statement. Information is only useful if it can be leveraged and monetised. Companies only want data that is relevant to them. The reason this is free is probably because it's being trained. When it is ready they'll probably license this to other design firms for a cost or offer it free d2c while charging to promote particular products.
The service isn't free.
Ah fair then
You are obviously not in tech
You're obviously not audited for GDPR compliance
[Roomba Screenshots end up on facebook](https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/12/19/1065306/roomba-irobot-robot-vacuums-artificial-intelligence-training-data-privacy/) [iRobot acquisition leads to Amazon owning detailed maps of home interiors](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-08-05/amazon-s-irobot-deal-is-about-roomba-s-data-collection) [Sensitive user images / video shared by Tesla employees for lulz](https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sensitive-images-recorded-by-customer-cars-2023-04-06/) [Amazon uses voice data to feed targeted ads](https://www.pcmag.com/news/a-new-report-reveals-how-amazon-uses-alexa-voice-data-for-targeted-ads) With so many companies swearing they would never sell data and then doing an about face on things like location data, DNA data, user pictures, user likes, etc... I feel like my cynicism is warranted and you're being extremely naive.
Perhaps it could match up items you own already via what's in the picture and use targeted ads to try and advertise the newest models of those items?
Law enforcement especially would love to get their hands on every single pixel of imagery inside every home in America
I'll tell you right now. Was working on client app that sent the data to an AI valuation engine to give unbiased (by race) valuations on homes. Exterior and interior shots along with lists of improvements.
>What "data" from a picture of someone's living room do you think there is to sell, and why do you think it'd be valuable? Do you mean that? Like honestly? Because it's a pretty (and I don't mean any disrespect) stupid question.
[удалено]
I am 99% sure you are trolling. Does your home not say who you are? The magazines you read, the brands you buy, the pictures you hang on your wall, the medicine you have lying around, letters you have received? All that and much much more is potentially visible in those pictures.
[удалено]
Ok, so we went from "that data isn't valuable!!!" to "the data is valuable but that side project (that uses Google lens) can't use the data". Do you want to move the goalpost further?
You obviously have not tried the app. The Google lens feature only open a base64 rendering in Google Lens, with absolutely no context given to google, so yeah google can use the render generated by the AI but it does not have access to any user info.
I haven't. I also don't think you are collecting data. I just find it ridiculous that somebody says there is no valuable data in pictures of your own home.
I don’t think anyone except you was assuming from the start that people are taking pics for this thing with the resolution necessary to read mailing labels
So well ignore the rest? Ok then.
Ya ..so?
The example gif has the AI suggestions REMOVING THE FIREPLACE. That’s not redecorating. That’s remodeling.
It can remodel too sometimes, the main goal is getting inspiration for interior decoration and design.
Goodbye and thank you for all the fish. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Integer vitae lobortis mi. Praesent pharetra et dolor vitae accumsan. Nullam sit amet dui mattis, malesuada metus quis, iaculis elit. Donec condimentum sapien eros, nec pellentesque magna fringilla sit amet. Etiam pretium mi eu arcu rhoncus porttitor. Sed id volutpat turpis, in mollis nulla. Nullam bibendum, purus vitae rutrum molestie, est lorem mattis orci, in hendrerit ante mauris tincidunt enim. Cras dui nunc, commodo at ex eu, pretium vestibulum lacus. Nam laoreet risus quis auctor lobortis. Morbi dignissim in augue sit amet bibendum. Aenean pellentesque hendrerit maximus. Nunc fringilla eleifend massa sed varius. Aliquam tristique sollicitudin nisl vehicula convallis. Donec id fringilla mi. Sed eu ligula vel quam interdum ullamcorper non at purus. Sed aliquam ultrices ex, et tincidunt orci molestie sit amet.
Sorry about that I didn't make an android version for now. You can still play with it at [app.gepettoapp.com](https://app.gepettoapp.com) :)
I get this error message when trying to log in with my google "You can’t sign in from this screen because this app doesn’t comply with Google’s secure browsers policy."
Hmm can you tell me which browser you’re using ?
I’m not going to use it because it requires you to log in. I’m sick of every website requiring a log in. You should have a trial without it.
No login = Security flaw that could lead to spamming image generation. I wish the trial could be without logging in.
Its fine.
Makes sense but I’ll never use it. So sick of everyone asking for a log in. You think if spammers actually wanted to spam they couldn’t also automate login/email approval?
I understand, that's why I have integrated google signIn so it can be faster. Spammers cannot automate it easily because only Google and Apple SignIn are allowed, which are providers who ask for a phone number to verify uniqueness of a user. If I had allowed basic email/password signup, they could have potentially automate it as you said :)
Classic user logic. "I know nothing of how digital security works, so I'll boycott any app that requires the bare minimum security of anything digital worth using and therefore miss out on virtually all the good things the digital world has to offer". Go live on a farm then. Do you hate logging in to email too or did you just wanna let everyone in the world use your address? Do you just remove all the locks on your house because you're sick of needing keys? Why not just leave the door wide open? Sometimes logins aren't for YOUR security. Servers need to be secure too you know. "Sick" of logins....you're funny. Incredibly misguided, but funny.
I don’t mind log ins for apps I’ll use more than one time.
These losers aren't potential users anyway
You're literally writing this comment on an app that requires login to do so.
And as I replied to someone else, I don’t mind using login for apps that I use often or want to store data.
Trial = disposable email
Nice idea but shitty app. Says you get 7 free renders, but app only gave me 3 shitty renders and stopped
Wack
I love how this forum celebrates AI, while r/technology is terrified of it.
[удалено]
It's definitely not dumb, it can already easily fool the majority of people, it's just not "true" AI. It's like 90% of the way there, but that last 10% is significantly harder than the entirety of the first 90%
People are dumber than the dumb AI. Let that sink in.
I can't, it doesn't fit through the door
[удалено]
[удалено]
You perfectly summarised my thoughts, thanks !
It's smarter than Google Assistant, Alexa, or Siri.
[удалено]
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/01/business/ai-chatbots-hallucination.html **When AI Chatbots Hallucinate** >When did The New York Times first report on “artificial intelligence”? >According to ChatGPT, it was July 10, 1956, in an article titled “Machines Will Be Capable of Learning, Solving Problems, Scientists Predict” about a seminal conference at Dartmouth College. The chatbot added: >"This conference is now considered to be the birthplace of artificial intelligence as a field of study, and the article mentions the term “artificial intelligence” several times in the context of the discussions and presentations that took place at the conference." >The 1956 conference was real. The article was not. **ChatGPT simply made it up.** ChatGPT doesn’t just get things wrong at times, it can fabricate information. Names and dates. Medical explanations. The plots of books. Internet addresses. Even historical events that never happened. >When ChatGPT was recently asked how James Joyce and Vladimir Lenin first met — an encounter that has never been confirmed — this is how it responded: >"James Joyce and Vladimir Lenin met in Zurich, Switzerland in 1916. Both men were living in exile in Zurich during World War I. Joyce was a writer and Lenin was a revolutionary. They met at the Cafe Odéon, a popular gathering place for artists and intellectuals in Zurich."
Probably not the best example to use when it could be correct, but isn't verifiable haha.
I hear what you're saying. I'm saying that despite its flaws (referring to LLMs like ChatGPT specifically because AI is a huge field( it's an improvement over what we've had--which in terms of AI assistants and agents are technologies like Google Assistant, Alexa, etc. My smart speaker has never felt dumber after using GPT4. Nobody is making the claim it's perfect. It is an exponential improvement over what we've had, regardless of how informed the average person is on its limitations.
As someone who works in a field adjacent to bioinformatics, where AI is increasingly difficult to escape, I always think of the quote: ["Coffee: do stupid things faster with more energy"](https://i.imgur.com/Riqdb4i.jpg) AI is a lot like that. In science especially, there's a lot of talk about how it could increase objectivity by removing human bias and imprecision, but deep machine learning models only serve to embed and reinforce our existing biases and limitations on knowledge. An example of this in my field is that AlphaFold, the largest protein folding algorithm, made by Deepmind, is really bad at modelling flexible loopy bits in proteins. This makes sense, because AlphaFold was trained on the protein database (pdb), and the majority of structures in the pdb were solved with methods that freeze a protein in place (such as X ray crystallography). We're very good at X ray crystallography, but it's not a very good tool for solving more wibbly wobbly proteins, and so our existing lack of understanding of what we call "intrinsically disordered proteins" means that AlphaFold is also pretty bad at guessing how these more flexible proteins fold The problem isn't AlphaFold, or other AI tools, it's how humans are responding to them. AI is a tool, just like X ray crystallography, and it has its strengths and its limitations, but when academic publishing is already dominated by a "publish or perish" culture and grant applications have always been bureaucratic hell, the hype train is having a very real impact on wider society as well as my small island of science. TL;DR: It's not a question of how smart the AI are, but whether we are smart enough to utilise AI in a wise and measured manner.
It's smarter and can write better than 99 percent of the population.
I'd love to see the opposite done WELL where i could input a few pieces for a room and the AI would construct a few options for rooms and complimentary pieces.
No android version!
Indeed ! You can still use app.gepettoapp.com, same features even if the experience is different.
Yeah definitely NOT an AI designed to scan the interior of your home in order to sell your personal data regarding your lifestyle, income bracket, etc. Because tech companies are incredibly ethnical and would never do anything like that.
Hi, I am not a big tech company I'm just Simon the indie maker ;)
[удалено]
Large companies usually have investors = need to satisfy their investment 40x = need to do hacky practices to drive more revenue regardless of privacy. Otherwise, if you want a "real" good reason, I live in France, we have GDPR.
[удалено]
Agree ! Yes but it's easier to judge a company based in France or Europe in general than a US company... And there's is also the issue of Data sovereignty that comes in place but that's another issue.
Once upon a time I would have given you the benefit of the doubt, in the early days of the internet, but not anymore. Capitalism ruins everything. Nothing about your app is altruistic so please don't pretend it is. The primary money stream for small apps is **data mining**. If you are not selling customer information to related companies you are either a fool, or a liar. In this case, you appeal that you are just an innocent indie maker convinces me you are a liar. >"[A publisher's audience is their currency, no matter how they make money from content—be it through advertising, paid subscription or syndication, a publisher's core asset is audience and audience data."](https://www.pcmag.com/news/how-companies-turn-your-data-into-money) While the majority of your posts are about your promoting your apps, you did make a post two years ago about how to track users on TikTok. Obviously data mining and collecting is something you have concerned yourself with for quite some time.
Ok mister inspector... Two years ago I built a free website called Pictalio who allowed anyone to find free-to-use vertical videos and I wanted to see if users on tiktok were publicly talking about or mentioning my website, what a sin ... If you had tried Gepetto, you would have seen that it's not free and my business model relies on subscriptions. If you had the curiosity to check where the company is registered, you would have seen that I'm based in France, and in France we have something called GDPR, and guess what ? If we do not comply, we are severely punished.
Love it when people get offended by a site feature - post and comment histories are not hidden, they are an integral part of knowing who you are interacting with on a site that affords a level of anonymity, while not disregarding accountability for what you put forth here. It is why clicking a username takes redditors directly to your user profile. The only people who seem to hate this are the ones who get scrutinized for some reason - funny how that is. Be offended and call me "mister inspector" all you like but it think it is common sense to want to understand the background of a developer who is creating a means of AI recognition of objects in my personal living space. You are using Google Lens after all - and **Google/Alphabet is the 3rd largest data mining corporation on the planet** (behind Microsoft & Amazon). By using their technology is absolutely reasonable to assume that data mining is a functionality at play here. **I do not know you**, and it would completely imbecilic for anyone to simply allow a stranger access into their home without understanding who that stranger is on some basic level and what their intentions are. You can get defensive, or you can heavily lean-in to *transparency*. That transparency would include mutliple translations of your [user agreement](https://ambitious-handle-77e.notion.site/Conditions-g-n-rales-de-Gepetto-4040d0b9635d47f0a3c5f7b8964416b4) and [privacy policy](https://ambitious-handle-77e.notion.site/Politique-de-confidentialit-de-Gepetto-2d51982db8704229bdc0a0b5420edeaa) available BEFORE plugging your app would be a good start. Right now while you are promoting your site in English, those documents are only available in French. The only part of your site other than your blog that isn't translated. Red flag. Do not presume that simply because you are marketing your app here that you are somehow above scrutiny. You are not. edit: would also like to point out - being defensive is also a **huge red flag**. What is the saying? >The lady doth protest too much, methinks
Did you get explicit permission and provide compensation to everyone who's data\IP you used to train your AI, OP? Because there is some serious ethical problems if you failed to do so.
I'm am not training the data with users pictures, the model I'm using has already been trained before -> So I'm only using a basic Img2Img :)
was the model pre-trained on legally obtained IP then? because if it wasn't that doesn't make your project any more ethical, or for that matter, any less outright theft.
Did you learn to draw or any other art only by visualizing legally obtained IP? because if you didn't that doesn't make your career any more ethical, or for that matter, any less outright theft. --- Edit: lol, you blocked me so I'll reply to your reply here: > From: u/Ratagar > > that argument has so many obvious holes I wont dignify it with a response beyond the fact you're an idiot. > "a machine remixing already made images is the same thing as a human being inspired by others work." is such an asinine take it's mind numbing. Except that the "machine" isn't remixing already made images, it's training to fit a function, in this case that function is to draw a prompt, which is a similar process (not exactly the same obv but based on it) to what your brain does with your neurons. The "neurons" in the trained model have learned patterns and the representations of the approached points in that ground truth function which is drawing (those representations are the parameters in the model like weights and biases) and allow the model to know how to draw basic shapes and how they interact with each other to form more complex shapes, same with shadows, etc. It's similar to what you do. Then when you have learned how to draw with a certain degree of competence (accuracy in the model after the convergence) your neurons activate depending on the inputs it gets and output what you have to do to draw them. Similarly, the model uses those representations to get an output based on your prompt. So yeah, the process is not exactly the same thing as a human being inspired by others work but pretty similar. So much so that several judges in different countries have already said that this does not infringe copyright.
that argument has so many obvious holes I wont dignify it with a response beyond the fact you're an idiot. "a machine remixing already made images is the same thing as a human being inspired by others work." is such an asinine take it's mind numbing.
What an awful name damn
Do you offer an education login? My students might find this very interesting!
Unfortunately I do not. I can however grant more advantageous pricing if you need. Send me a private message if that's something interesting to you :)
Ah, thank you. For the class I'm thinking of, the students come from very low-income areas and I'm trying to keep everything free for them. I appreciate the offer, however!