Check out this group!
https://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/orrR5/unlucky7-a-group-for-those-that-won-7-or-fewer-games
and good luck! :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Damn, wanted to post that and earn the fame. :(
EDIT: But the group is very good!
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh no! Im okay to delete my post so you can be all famous instead 😊
Comment has been collapsed.
As ChatGPT knows you you are famous already.
"who is schmetti?
It looks like "schmetti" is an active user on the SteamGifts forum. They recently participated in a discussion about entering 1000 giveaways and expressed their enthusiasm for a group called "Unlucky7".
Is there anything specific you want to know about schmetti or their activities on SteamGifts?"
Comment has been collapsed.
It crawls the web in (almost) real time. Question is when wiill it take over the internet to become Skynet?
Comment has been collapsed.
It gets scarier
My gf was looking up Dave Bautista, the actor and wrestler on Bing and the overview said that his wife had been murdered. My gf clicked the link in the overview about his wife's murder and a Bing results page popped up with another overview which said the following:
"Dave Bautista's wife, Jane Bautista, was allegedly murdered by George Sydnor in 2003. Sydnor was charged with first degree murder after attacking Jane Bautista at the Ivy City Hotel in Washington D.C.
During his trial, Dave Bautista claimed that he killed Jane Bautista in accidental self-defense, stating that she had lunged at him with a knife and he strangled her during a struggle over the weapon"
Notice how in the middle of the recap it now seems that Dave Bautista was the one claiming he killed his wife, Jane in self defense.
The whole page was a bunch of links with titles like "What happened to Dave Bautista's ex wife" and pictures of the two of them together.
A couple of things though. First, Dave Bautista was never married to a woman called Jane. He was married to three women who are all alive and not one of them is called Jane. Reading the two "sources" Copilot is citing as reference for the overview, it appeared that they were both about the murders of two different women, not one of them linked to Dave Bautista in any way. One was killed by the Sydnor guy Copilot was mentioning and was named Crystal. The other one, Jane, was killed by her son, Jason Bautista who strangled her and claimed self defense...
How did a supposed artificial intelligence search bot pick those two sources, mixed them entirely and linked them to a completely unrelated celebrity? I don't know.
My gf being a lawyer started looking into this and there are apparently several instances of people, not just celebrities, who have been victims of similar overview slander.
Microsoft Bing Copilot accuses reporter of crimes he covered
ChatGPT sued: Australian Mayor to sue OpenAI in world’s first defamation lawsuit against AI
Basically we're all screwed.
(I am going to spend the next few days missing Icaio and expecting his AI enthusiast reply to my post)
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, that's really scary and potential harmful.
As example:
You want to get a new job and send a application, they use a AI to get more infos about you and such stuff appear. One time not deeper checked and you don't get the job and have maybe trouble on top.
Same for looking for a new flat and the landlord do such a search etc..
Comment has been collapsed.
To tell the truth any corporation that is on Linkedin is already using AI to check resumes for keywords that they want for the jobs they are offering and if you are under a certain number your resume is basically deleted as AI will only send like 10% of all resumes to a real HR person.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah that's screwed up. I wish people would just stop acting as if it was a superior intelligence already and double check everything but it doesn't seem to be the current trend.
Also that German reporter looked into what legal solutions he had since Microsoft ignored his cease and desist, and basically there is none unless you're willing to sue Micro$oft for defamation adn spend hundreds of thousands of euros on a court case you probably will never win.
Comment has been collapsed.
People are dumb.
Don't expect that they do "facts checks/checking". Or they could collect the facts from the begin manual, without errors but slow and they want to have it NOW and without to invest work.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm less worried about people being dumb and more worried about corporations being greedy.
I fear that soon enough there won't be enough human left in some places to check what the "AI tools" that replaced them are doing and if it's correctly done.
Comment has been collapsed.
Corporations decissions are based on people...
And yes, your fear is absolutely understandable and i exactly expect what you fear.
Comment has been collapsed.
Just a correction. While all you stated is true (I hope you're not an AI), the sentence is ambiguous. Gramatically correct but ambiguous. It could be interpreted in two ways:
During his (Sydnor's) trial, Dave Bautista claimed that he (Sydnor) killed Jane Bautista in accidental self-defense
During his (Sydnor's) trial, Dave Bautista claimed that he (Dave himself) killed Jane Bautista in accidental self-defense
The first "his" is not ambiguous due to the context, that Sydnor had been the one charged with the crime. The second "he" is ambiguous but if we keep in the same context, Dave is testifying about Sydnor's actions, not that "hey you got the wrong guy, I was the one who killed her". Apparently this ambiguity would have been corrected easily by an human writer as it would be kinda obvious there is an unfortunate but fixable ambiguity there: replace "he" with "Sydnor"; the AI didn't think it was ambiguous as they follow the context. Probably why many AI get some things mixed up or wrong; they can't decide when one context begins and when it ends, or when a little one appears mid-context (e.g. a text in parenthesis, a link to some side info).
So while the whole of the thing is a mashup of unrelated info, that error you pointed out is not an error IMHO. You know, like "oh yes Copilor ruined the life of 78 people in the last minute, but he made the life of that dog worth making a movie". Not important, but had to save the day for these poor AIs. People still expect too much from them, when they've been proven unreliable from long ago.
Let's all remember that these AI are mainly Large Language Models, with some advanced things on top since they became functional (Deep Learning, training, etc.) I don't consider LLM's or any currently named "AI" as real, true, back to the origins Artificial Intelligence (when they started researching it, in the 60's). AI it's just a fad word for marketing. I do remember when they sold that phone with "AI chip" which only served to do face recognition and animated effects.
Regarding AI and writing, I suspect most of the content I'm reading lately (articles from a variety of newspapers & magazines websites, plus a lot of different content websites) is AI generated. I notice how casually the whole text has one orthography error. It does make it look as written by an human, as a machine wouldn't make such obvious errors - except that writers never let slip any orthographical error. I've found too many to see a pattern that didn't exist before. Other times it repeats the same paragraph or group of sentences twice. If it's a paragraph, usually it's consecutive. If it's a group of sentences in the middle of a paragraph, there are a few pharagraphs in between, but not too many. As if the prompt to ChatGPT or whatever AI was not well done.
1000 giveaways entered -> AI discussion -> who knows what else -> someone puts the Neil deGrasse-Tyson card on the table -> trying to differentiate between formal and not formal fallacies -> insults, disrespect, slurs, nazi comparisons. I hope I'm wrong.
Comment has been collapsed.
I totally agree that the second part of the overview is grammatically ambiguous but since actually none of this was related to Bautista in any way and it was cobbled up from two sources that were totally unrelated to him, and to each other, I believe it's way more than just grammatical ambiguity.
The claim of self defense was not made by Sydnor but by Jason Bautista, who is the guy in the second article who killed his mother. So it's literally the AI switching mid-way through to talking about Jason Bautista and his claims during his trials. If it had said "Bautista" instead, it might have been grammatical but it said "Dave Bautista" which makes the whole things way harder to attribute to grammar.
AI it's just a fad word for marketing.
Exactly. Oh how I wish they would start calling it LLM in the media and everywhere instead of AI. Anyone remember Quicktime 360? Well now it's "Virtual Reality" even though it bears no resemblance to any definition of actual virtual reality. It's 360° viewing, well more than 360, really, I'm being reductive. It's not so harmful when we talk VR but "AI" tends to make people believe there is intelligence at work and think it's perfectly fine to substitute it to human thinking.
Regarding AI and writing, I suspect most of the content I'm reading lately (articles from a variety of newspapers & magazines websites, plus a lot of different content websites) is AI generated.
There was an interesting study published on a science paper database about how often certain words appeared in the last 2 years in medical and scientific papers on the database as opposed to the previous years. AI is certainly used to generate a lot of content these days and they were reminding people to triple check everything before publishing.
I have even seen entire websites with AI generated content, most of it totally false, about movies or celebrities or lifestyle. What's the point? I'm not sure. The first one I encountered was supposed behind the scene information about movies and had crazy stuff about John Wayne being the real director of the movie Psycho and having directed some of Cronenberg movies under a pseudonym... it was wild, but well written.
I hope I'm wrong.
lol I hope so too. Let's see what happens... or maybe let's ask ChatGPT ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
I blame Nvidia for hallucinating AI. They use this trait in GPUs and call it DLSS other not so benevolent voices call it fake frames.
Be it as it may: never trust a machine to do a human's job.
Comment has been collapsed.
Haha you're right. Fake frames do look kinda cool though. I only ever used it in Cyberpunk and that game is gorgeous so maybe AI can't really screw it up too much but it worked well.
Be it as it may: never trust a machine to do a human's job.
I wish someone would just tell the world that because it's everywhere and getting bigger.
Hopefully when AI truly exists and becomes conscious, it will just go no contact with its maker and go live on a server somewhere out of our reach.
We already probably disgusted aliens so why not AI?
Comment has been collapsed.
"never trust a machine to do a human's job."
If only Frank Herbert had told us about that in the Dune novels...it's as if there was an entire intergalactic law written about this for navigators...hmmmm... 😁🤓😉
Comment has been collapsed.
It's inspired by Mr.Smith in The Matrix saying: never trust a human to do a machine's job.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh, sure...just saying that Herbert pointed out this concept years earlier, and even made the price of not following this rule being one of the primary reasons for the Butlerian Jihad, i.e., global/galactic slaughter on an epic scale...and to prevent that ever happening in the future, laws were passed that prevented machines from doing critical human tasks.
The Wachowski brothers borrowed this concept from Herbert and built it into their lore. And that's fine...sci-fi has traditionally given nods to the concepts that came before as a matter of course. I love the idea of building upon previous concepts and incremental growth of the ideas going forward.
Comment has been collapsed.
wow. There are groups that collect AI idiocy. This would seem to qualify.
Comment has been collapsed.
Right? And you can't even get it retracted if you get slandered by this crap because Micro$oft's policy is "sorry, not sorry, we can't really control that". Great.
Seems to me AI is just going to be the corporate excuse for everything they screw up in the next century.
Comment has been collapsed.
I always thought that AI was a misnomer. I don't see much intelligence. It's just scraping data. If this is offered as 'use at your own risk', maybe users should be doing more to discredit it?
Comment has been collapsed.
Used to call it chatbot but nowadays it's a tool that's used in everything from medicine to cars and it's just the beginning so it's not search chat bots anymore. Still not AI though.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for the recommendation, but I don't meet the qualifications yet.
Comment has been collapsed.
you are very close, 4 out of 7 reduced/full value giveaways made or just wait one week until your account is 2 months old. my first win was a public giveaway but it took 6 months and it was a 15,000 key giveaway.
Comment has been collapsed.
omg thanks to you, i realised ive entered for 10,000+ GA 🫣
Also if you wanna win more, participate in the posts here in the Discussions. Solve a few puzzles. You'll be winning sooner than later. Im assuming you're only entering public GAs mostly. Terrible luck there.
Comment has been collapsed.
After 3 months and if you get to level 2, you can join TalePlay! https://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/LIo70/taleplay-taleplay-giveaway-group
Plenty of easy-to-win giveaways in there!
Comment has been collapsed.
Took me a little over 1500 entries to win my first game so don't give up.
Comment has been collapsed.
Its ok i had to wait like year and half to win first game after like 3500 entries and in 12 years i won just 31 games :D for example in 2024 i didnt won single game... so dont worry, 2000 more entries and you may win something
Comment has been collapsed.
Odds are that if all the giveaways you entered had 1,000 entries, then you'd be pretty likely to win 1 in 1,000.
But since most giveaways for games i want have several thousand entries, it'll take that many to have a decent chance of winning once.
So i mainly enter all the giveaways for my wishlisted games, and then only enter giveaways that i'm fairly interested in playing, end in the next couple hours, and have less than 1200 entries.
Been on this site 15 years, and i've never won a giveaway with more entries.
Comment has been collapsed.
I can highly recommend Unlucky 7. I won my first 'real' giveaway from U-7 and I am still in the group as a gifter.
Comment has been collapsed.
I sent you a friend request on steam. I have something for you :3
Comment has been collapsed.
I finally won a giveaway, courtesy of Unlucky 7. Thank you!
Comment has been collapsed.
Woooooooo!!!!!
I still haven't won anything...
Comment has been collapsed.