Secretkeeper_Dragon wrote:

showerinqlotus wrote:

YEAH SCREW AI!!!

YEAH!

ai is good?? it's being used in hospitals and helping patients where doctors can't

Rosics wrote:

Secretkeeper_Dragon wrote:

showerinqlotus wrote:

YEAH SCREW AI!!!

YEAH!

ai is good?? it's being used in hospitals and helping patients where doctors can't

it's not good on scratch tho

Rosics wrote:

ai is good?? it's being used in hospitals and helping patients where doctors can't

while it may be helpful in those scenarios, the majority of ai use on the internet is generative and has no real societal benefit

ametrine_ wrote:

Rosics wrote:

ai is good?? it's being used in hospitals and helping patients where doctors can't

while it may be helpful in those scenarios, the majority of ai use on the internet is generative and has no real societal benefit

Unless you like using it to actual socialize with someone :3

Rosics wrote:

ai is good?? it's being used in hospitals and helping patients where doctors can't

Well, I see where you're coming from but this is scratch. It's an educational kids site. My personal opinion is that AI would be pretty bad if introduced to scratch and a bunch of kids. Unless we could train AI to actually help foster creativity (I have a few more things to say about training) then maybe it could help but AI could edit the project and change it completely if kids decided to let it. Also, people are talking about training the AI bots using other peoples projects. People who's projects are used will be credited, but some people just don't want their projects to be used. I just… I don't think scratch AI is a good idea.

Rosics wrote:

ai is good?? it's being used in hospitals and helping patients where doctors can't

On a learning platform it isn't necessarily as good as if you were to be using it for good.
Yes, ai is good in some scenarios, but in others not so much. ESPECIALLY when it comes the creative community. Like on coding, they will use other scratch projects to help whoever's coding, but I feel like that may limit a bit of creativity of trial and error, there's more ways than one to code, and if kids don't learn that, sometimes it can go wrong with their games or just their limited knowledge of what can be possible to use.

And in every other aspect of the creative field such as art, music, photography, and development, its not the best option. I hope you know why ;-; .

You can also consider Roblox as a bad example of misuse of AI (though i'm more than glad that scratch isnt going to do anything as bad as that)

little_bittle wrote:

Rosics wrote:

ai is good?? it's being used in hospitals and helping patients where doctors can't

Well, I see where you're coming from but this is scratch. It's an educational kids site. My personal opinion is that AI would be pretty bad if introduced to scratch and a bunch of kids. Unless we could train AI to actually help foster creativity (I have a few more things to say about training) then maybe it could help but AI could edit the project and change it completely if kids decided to let it. Also, people are talking about training the AI bots using other peoples projects. People who's projects are used will be credited, but some people just don't want their projects to be used. I just… I don't think scratch AI is a good idea.

I feel like its better if the AI were to recommend projects for them to check out, like if the kid wanted to do an animation the ai would bring projects up which the kid can look through the code and learn. (that's basically what I do with my projects)

There could also just be recommended projects that are all about teaching, like tutorials or step-by-step walkthrough etc.

Can we focus more on the suggestion please you know the Protection Clause

Guys, why don't we come up with what ST could say in a clause agreement thing so we can agree or not agree to let our things be used for ai training :3

Picklegal07 wrote:

Guys, why don't we come up with what ST could say in a clause agreement thing so we can agree or not agree to let our things be used for ai training :3

There's a suggestion for that here https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/862377/

yeah… there are many inactive people on this site, and this is happening while they don’t know, and they may not approve. it should really only apply to projects made after the tos update, by people who acknowledge it and what may come with it.

sstarmilk wrote:

yeah… there are many inactive people on this site, and this is happening while they don’t know, and they may not approve. it should really only apply to projects made after the tos update, by people who acknowledge it and what may come with it.

I agree. :3

SkyCedar wrote:

Many projects that would not have been shared if there was an ai are now going to be trained off of. It’s unfair to switch the tos and have it apply to the old projects without any sort of protection clause on them. There should be a clause legally added to the tos stating no projects shared before the update should be trained off of without permission of the creators, as they did not consent to this when they shared them.

Edit so this topic doesn’t get flagged as a dupe:
This is not an opt out topic!
This is not a “I don’t like the tos rewrite it” topic!
This is a new suggestion.

I completely agree! This makes a lot of sense. I hope ST sees the suggestion.

Ok everyone after doing some research I found out that our work won't be trained on AI. Instead, Scratch is adding AI coding blocks where people can create chatbots for NPCs, OCs, etc. This is good for people who want to make their OCs or NPCs seem actually intelligent- so we don't need to have pre-coded responses! So if you are like me who works to bring your OCs to life (in my case I'm making an indie series, as well as plan to make ai bots for my OCs on this site) then you should be excited! Why aren't more people talking about this??? This actually empowers our creativity by bringing lifelike aspects to our characters and fill them with personality!!

I agree that AI should not be trained on old projects. In fact, I don't think AI should be added at all. Part of coding is struggling and finding a solution on your own, and adding an AI will take away from that.

SkyCedar wrote:

Many projects that would not have been shared if there was an ai are now going to be trained off of. It’s unfair to switch the tos and have it apply to the old projects without any sort of protection clause on them. There should be a clause legally added to the tos stating no projects shared before the update should be trained off of without permission of the creators, as they did not consent to this when they shared them.

Edit so this topic doesn’t get flagged as a dupe:
This is not an opt out topic!
This is not a “I don’t like the tos rewrite it” topic!
This is a new suggestion.

I completely agree. I think the main reason for the outrage against the TOS was because people had posted their art, their games, their projects, and were under the impression that their work would be protected. If users want to continue to make projects knowing their work could be used, go for it. I’m actually okay with my stuff getting used by AI if I made the projects with that purpose in mind. However, making old projects fair game would also mean this could take from Scratchers that are no longer active and did not agree to the TOS. Additionally, there are projects on here from Scratchers no longer with us. I think it would be extremely disrespectful to take work from members that have passed.

eeveesylveon777 wrote:

Ok everyone after doing some research I found out that our work won't be trained on AI. Instead, Scratch is adding AI coding blocks where people can create chatbots for NPCs, OCs, etc. This is good for people who want to make their OCs or NPCs seem actually intelligent- so we don't need to have pre-coded responses! So if you are like me who works to bring your OCs to life (in my case I'm making an indie series, as well as plan to make ai bots for my OCs on this site) then you should be excited! Why aren't more people talking about this??? This actually empowers our creativity by bringing lifelike aspects to our characters and fill them with personality!!

Okay wait this is awesome- source(s)??

Sslsksj wrote:

Ai gets revomed in 2029

Please avoid making such statements without citing a source.

This sounds like it might be wrong.

Ryx_here wrote:

I feel like its better if the AI were to recommend projects for them to check out, like if the kid wanted to do an animation the ai would bring projects up which the kid can look through the code and learn. (that's basically what I do with my projects)

It already will do that, alongside bringing up relevant sprites from the projects it recommends, and explaining scripts from them

Rosics wrote:

this is not true, they aren't doing that, it's an opt in system DUH!

Source?

I agree that projects shared by people who went inactive before the update should not have their work used to train an AI, even if it's just to help kids code. Since they never actually did agree to the TOS.