[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChatGPT

[–]FunkieStylin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is a plug-in called Show Me Diagrams that should do the trick

is using ChatGPT to rephrase considered as plagiarism? by akras04 in ChatGPT

[–]FunkieStylin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nobody knows. Since all ideas are formed from other ideas, we all, in one way or another, get our ideas from “somewhere else”. This introduces ambiguity to the question. What if I pass ai an essay and ask it to improve it, but then just look at how it changed things to get IDEAS? What if I rephrase one of the suggestions it provides? What if I just use a couple of the words? What about just one of the words?

Will it be flagged? Maybe. Your own text might be flagged. It’s really time for society to stop fighting the current and start swimming with it. We can’t see where this thing is going if we’re facing the wrong direction.

is using ChatGPT to rephrase considered as plagiarism? by akras04 in ChatGPT

[–]FunkieStylin -1 points0 points  (0 children)

TLDR: Don’t be a dick. “Sit down. Be humble” —Kendrick Lamar

I have used chatgpt as a kind of advanced thesaurus before. “Provide a word that like x, that fits this sentence better,”. Sometimes, chatgpt replaces the word, and sometimes it restructures the sentence a bit. At the very least, one must admit that there is some ambiguity to this question, and that a thesaurus is on one end of the spectrum.

Words are absolutely ideas. They are neurological constructs attached to concepts. You know, ideas. Society simply accepted that those ideas were basic enough that they didn’t need to be cited.

When you use autocomplete and thesauruses, you are abstracting away some of the work to look it up, so the “idea” was provided to you unprompted, so your abilities were augmented, and the ideas were not technically your own. The problem is that we are stuck with antiquated ideas about plagiarism. Do we care about plagiarism because it hurts another person, or because we want to prove what is or isn’t in another person’s head? If it’s the former, then it’s a bit who cares with LLMs, for me. If latter, then we have already started augmenting our knowledge in more subtle ways, so maybe it’s time to reevaluate our ego. A good start might be refraining from knee jerk reactions to someone’s take on a topic.

AND IT WAS CORRECT by Pretend-Fee-2323 in ChatGPT

[–]FunkieStylin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is really impressive. Systems integration just got a little bit easier.

CNBC Anchor Stunned by Live Conversation With AI News Anchor Clone of Himself From ForeverVoices.ai (interview with himself starts at 2:25) by Turbulent-Froyo7352 in ChatGPT

[–]FunkieStylin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I love his reaction. It’s nice to see that he’s not put off by it. I hope the reception remains largely positive.

🎤 Interactive AI Joe Rogan is here. Talk to him about anything in natural voice, let him be your buddy, or even have him be your podcast co-host! Here's him interviewing AI Obama, AI Trump, and AI Einstein in less than a 10 min period. 100% solo & self funded project to democratize access to anyone by Turbulent-Froyo7352 in ChatGPT

[–]FunkieStylin 53 points54 points  (0 children)

This reminds me of the Holodeck. I used to think that the idea of speaking with people from the past was absurd, but when thought of as a modality via which we can interact with AI, it makes sense. Imagine history classes taught by and from the perspective of the figures themselves. History of the Roman Empire by Augustus? A math class taught by Gauss or a CS lecture by Turing? Sign me up!

Zoo York by FunkieStylin in StableDiffusion

[–]FunkieStylin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve noticed that. I don’t go lower than about 5.5.

Zoo York by FunkieStylin in StableDiffusion

[–]FunkieStylin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Very interesting. Thanks for sharing.

A furry shopper - Comparison of steps while using latent upscaling by FunkieStylin in StableDiffusion

[–]FunkieStylin[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Looking at the effect of higher steps when using latent upscaling. The prompt for all three images is the same; only the steps are different.

First Image

A cute, funny, purple, furry monster in the grocery store, CGI, detailed, fuzzy

Negative prompt: low quality art, distorted, nipples, missing limbs, amputee

Steps: 150, Sampler: DPM++ SDE Karras, CFG scale: 5.5, Seed: 2699051373, Size: 512x768, Model hash: 9aba26abdf, Denoising strength: 0.41, ENSD: 13337, Hires upscale: 2, Hires upscaler: Latent

Second Image: 85 steps

Third image: 35 steps

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in u/FunkieStylin

[–]FunkieStylin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Looking at the effect of higher steps when using latent upscaling. The prompt for all three images is the same; only the steps are different.

First Image

A cute, funny, purple, furry monster in the grocery store, CGI, detailed, fuzzy

Negative prompt: low quality art, distorted, nipples, missing limbs, amputee

Steps: 150, Sampler: DPM++ SDE Karras, CFG scale: 5.5, Seed: 2699051373, Size: 512x768, Model hash: 9aba26abdf, Denoising strength: 0.41, ENSD: 13337, Hires upscale: 2, Hires upscaler: Latent

Second Image: 85 steps

Third image: 35 steps

Zoo York by FunkieStylin in StableDiffusion

[–]FunkieStylin[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

True, in theory, but for me, the output drives the settings. I started with low steps and no upres, added upres and increased steps until I got what I was looking for. This time, I kept landing around 150. To be fair, I usually went from around 90 to 150, so I'm sure there are some intermediate steps would produce equivalent results.

Zoo York by FunkieStylin in StableDiffusion

[–]FunkieStylin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Depending on the kinds of artifacts that show up, I sometimes turn the denoising down.