Versipelle

I agree, this is a trend I'm seeing all over the place with generative AI: first, break a functioning, human-based workflow by flooding it with AI generated content. Blame the persons maintaining the workflow for being the bottleneck and hindering innovation. Then, implement generative AI in the workflow review or approval process to keep up the pace, irrespective of how valuable the extra generated stuff has been.

Yes, AI etiquette is what we need. The question is “how much human processing on the AI output is necessary before considering it no longer a meat proxy”. My way to coin it is “If you feel the need to specify in your answer that it is AI generated, work it more”.

In the end, nobody cares whether you used your memory and expertise alone, asked a peer, googled it, or asked ChatGPT to refine your answer. As long as you verified it, rephrased to match company lingo and can vouch for it, everyone is happy.

Ha yeah I totally agree, that's actually one of the future posts I have in draft : the other downfall of GenAI in cyber. You can't outsource learning, and a lot of learning opportunities in the Cybersecurity industry are getting totally ruined by llms (ctf, low hanging fruit bug bounties, foss software getting burnout by AI slop and closing the gate to potential newbie willing to get involved, etc.)

I tend to agree but open weight model seem to still be lagging behind in terms of capacity, even the recent ones like GLM 5.2. If anything I hope the sudden, unpredictable changes of policy will make EU companies think twice before putting all their eggs in the same AI vendors's basket, all US based. Vendors coming back on their retention policies like they did with Fable 5 or plainly cutting the service without notice should be a gigantic red flag about your business continuity.

It's maddening how the corporate world can get shy of using any of those Chinese models, just because they are Chinese. This kind of FUD makes little sense when the inference is done in-house or by an EU/US cloud provider.

Fair, let's say a heavily staggered come back.

I was actually pleased to see OpenAI openly (although timidly) complaining about the situation in their latest announcement, framing it as an unsustainable system.

One can only guess the outrage in the news if the Chinese government had been the first to pull this kind of stunt.

I've been brewing on this topic since Mythos preview was announced. As Mythos got finally released, then banned, then released again under U.S. government control, it was time to finally flesh it out and use it as a way to exit the lurker-zone on HN !

> Wouldn’t it be more desirable to hear an actual human on an audiobook? Ideally the author?

Of course, but it's not always available.

For example, I would love an audiobook for Stanisław Lem's "The Invincible," as I just finished its video game adaptation, yet it simply doesn't exist in my native language.

It's quite seldom that the author narrates the audiobooks I listen to, and sometimes the narrator does a horrible job, butchering the characters with exaggerated tones.