codubee wrote:

(#3306)
Ad hominem attacks seem to about spot on for you. Have you never used slack (or the chat software that must not be named) where you can put emphasis on chunks of text without ever having your fingers leave the keyboard? o_O

codubee wrote:

(#3306)

The only response I'm going to give your wall of text is that a good portion of it had me nodding along to it. In fact, it's almost as if you were on the Scratch Team and understand how we actually work.

codubee wrote:

(#3306)
…and yet, you don't seem to understand that, or don't want to… What you are describing about “vibe coding” just would not be Scratch™. So what is it that you think you're arguing about?

Foxofpeace wrote:

scratchcode1_2_3 wrote:

-snip due to the post being extremely big-
I hope you read every word in this. Thank you.

ur joking, right?

Foxofpeace wrote:

Foxofpeace wrote:

littlejoeywhoiscool wrote:

codubee wrote:

littlejoeywhoiscool wrote:

Just a little question… who made this decision? And did everyone in Scratch Team initially agree on it?

What decision are you talking about? A single person did not make this decision, stop spreading lies about how the “Scratch Team” has no power, or somehow wasn't involved in the decision. The Team is part of that decision making process, _by definition_.

Here’s another question, why do you have the audacity to accuse me of spreading lies when I was just asking a question.

p.l.i.t.d.

p.l.i.t.d.

its strange how @codubee is all confident with addressing all of the posts, meanwhile, @codubee wont adress this question and isnt talking about it even though i have quoted it 3 times now

codubee wrote:

What decision are you talking about? A single person did not make this decision, stop spreading lies about how the “Scratch Team” has no power, or somehow wasn't involved in the decision. The Team is part of that decision making process, _by definition_.

IloveRoblox003 wrote:

LD67123 wrote:

Do not use face sensing! I think it uses Ai!!!!!!

Not all AI is bad..

For example, early AI was just a bunch of verey complex if statements

Face Sensing is Machine Learning, but that doesnt mean its a Generative AI.
It detects patterns and things like that to detect a face. Doesnt generate a new face, doesnt make text, none of that.

Machine learning AIs dont have to be costly either. Some can be implemented on a budget.

LD67123 wrote:

IloveRoblox003 wrote:

LD67123 wrote:

Do not use face sensing! I think it uses Ai!!!!!!

Not all AI is bad..

For example, early AI was just a bunch of verey complex if statements

Face Sensing is Machine Learning, but that doesnt mean its a Generative AI.
It detects patterns and things like that to detect a face. Doesnt generate a new face, doesnt make text, none of that.

Machine learning AIs dont have to be costly either. Some can be implemented on a budget.

I know but it could get sent to a ai server to train it off your face

scratchcode1_2_3 wrote:

…
you say that the CLA hasn't been implemented yet, which is true, but with all the stuff that has already been put out there, it seems like it's going to be just a chatbox. why not make it cute and teachable?

scratchcode1_2_3 wrote:

but to cut you guys some slack, pretty sure that pixar worked for months on toy story movies but they ended up scrapping them entirely and restarting.

however, It'd be better if you just held it off for a while. You'd need a lot of work to make sure it doesn't tell a kid to stick a fork in the outlet or teaches them on how to make a weapon of mass destruction

sup3r_r0ck wrote:

Ok yeah I’m confused, I need codubee to just state what they’re doing with Ai because I have literally no clue what’s going on

codubee wrote:

scratchcode1_2_3 wrote:

…
you say that the CLA hasn't been implemented yet, which is true, but with all the stuff that has already been put out there, it seems like it's going to be just a chatbox. why not make it cute and teachable?

Lets stop right there… Have we released the CLA in any form yet? No? Huh. Then how can you make confident assertions about what it is or isn't? The only thing I've seen you talking about in this thread are creating straw persons and then knocking them down.

scratchcode1_2_3 wrote:

but to cut you guys some slack, pretty sure that pixar worked for months on toy story movies but they ended up scrapping them entirely and restarting.

however, It'd be better if you just held it off for a while. You'd need a lot of work to make sure it doesn't tell a kid to stick a fork in the outlet or teaches them on how to make a weapon of mass destruction

Iterating on an idea, requires actually iterating on it, and trying it out, that's what Pixar was doing. And, it's what we do.

Are you also amongst the folks who seem to believe that the Scratch Foundation is some sort of shady organization in the background pulling ToS's out of thin air and putting them on the website behind our backs some how? I can't believe I'm having to even type this but, Scratch Foundation is and always has been Scratch.

Before we spun out of the MIT Media Lab, the Scratch Foundation was based near Washington DC, and was the conduit through which grants and money from high network individuals would be routed into the Lifelong Kindergarten group at MIT. There were two employees in the Foundation who coordinated philanthropic donations, and, they were considered to be part of the Scratch Team.

In 2020, we spun out of the lab and everyone who did, resigned from their positions with MIT, officially at midnight 2019-2020, and then were immediately hired, effectively a few seconds later into the Scratch Foundation. The Scratch Foundation is the Scratch Team. The Scratch Team is the Scratch Foundation.

codubee wrote:

Foxofpeace wrote:

scratchcode1_2_3 wrote:

-snip due to the post being extremely big-
I hope you read every word in this. Thank you.

ur joking, right?

Foxofpeace wrote:

Foxofpeace wrote:

littlejoeywhoiscool wrote:

codubee wrote:

littlejoeywhoiscool wrote:

Just a little question… who made this decision? And did everyone in Scratch Team initially agree on it?

What decision are you talking about? A single person did not make this decision, stop spreading lies about how the “Scratch Team” has no power, or somehow wasn't involved in the decision. The Team is part of that decision making process, _by definition_.

Here’s another question, why do you have the audacity to accuse me of spreading lies when I was just asking a question.

p.l.i.t.d.

p.l.i.t.d.

its strange how @codubee is all confident with addressing all of the posts, meanwhile, @codubee wont adress this question and isnt talking about it even though i have quoted it 3 times now

Pardon? I'm sorry, which part of

codubee wrote:

What decision are you talking about? A single person did not make this decision, stop spreading lies about how the “Scratch Team” has no power, or somehow wasn't involved in the decision. The Team is part of that decision making process, _by definition_.

is not answering that question?

littlejoeywhoiscool wrote:

Here’s another question, why do you have the audacity to accuse me of spreading lies when I was just asking a question.

-BluEagle- wrote:

we should genuinely be grateful we have someone associated with scratch to answer our questions in the first place. (wasn’t this one of the goals of this topic anyways? to get the st to notice it?)
every human makes mistakes, and I think that should be expected from someone dealing with 35 people asking 35 questions at once.

Magudragon wrote:

codubee wrote:

Blobfish_Industries wrote:

I did not know that it's run locally. That being said, will the new AI be ran locally? Even if it is, training is expensive.

Yes it is expensive. Who said we're doing that?

codubee wrote:

pippy2011eight wrote:

wait, I'm confused, how do you make an AI without training?

Because that's not what we're doing!

codubee wrote:

[I'm not going to do that, because, as I've said multiple times in this thread, we're continuing to iterate on designs for it and unfortunately, I'm not going to come out and say “We'll not be using AI anytime soon” because that's false. We're already making use of our new tooling to help surface content issues with projects, to help moderators catch things buried/hidden inside projects.

codubee wrote:

We're already making use of our new tooling to help surface content issues with projects, to help moderators catch things buried/hidden inside projects.

codubee wrote:

Exascerbescence wrote:

No, it was because a moderator had explicitly said that the moderators — all of the moderators — didn’t know about the TOS changes (at least, not until after the flame wars that started because of them had been dealt with.)

Could you please tell me why you think I am taking @cheddargirl’s post out of context, and what the alternative context would be?

For context here is that post again with the subquote I had removed in error in my sources post

cheddargirl wrote:

mingo-gag wrote:

pippy2011eight wrote:

I find it a bit suspicious how this was closed 4 DAYS before the new terms of service

Some Moderators didn't even know about this update.

This was closed because it was flamey here.so let's not start a flame war again.

More like… all the moderators. …snip

Lets back up here:

The first reference is “some moderators didn't know” with a link. Only, nothing of the kind is shown there. It's a back and forth that showed the moderator didn't catch that it was the ToS being referenced in their reply, they realize that and post a link to it. Did they say they didn't know about it? Nope.

As for cheddargirl's statement, hyperbole gets the best of everyone. I can assure you that the ToS changes did not arrive behind the Scratch Team's back. The Scratch Team _wrote_ them with the guidance of lawyers. I was there.

scratchcode1_2_3 wrote:

-snip-

codubee wrote:

Exascerbescence wrote:

snip

Lets back up here:

The first reference is “some moderators didn't know” with a link. Only, nothing of the kind is shown there. It's a back and forth that showed the moderator didn't catch that it was the ToS being referenced in their reply, they realize that and post a link to it. Did they say they didn't know about it? Nope.

As for cheddargirl's statement, hyperbole gets the best of everyone. I can assure you that the ToS changes did not arrive behind the Scratch Team's back. The Scratch Team _wrote_ them with the guidance of lawyers. I was there.

codubee wrote:

Magudragon wrote:

Even Scratch Team seems to be as clueless as the rest of us, and that one user from the Scratch foundation (the foundation in charge of the TOS change)

Wow. Who do you think runs the whole site and develops for it? It's been the Scratch Foundation since 2020. 6. Years. The group of people who were running Scratch from inside the MIT Media Lab, were spun out into the Scratch Foundation. You're talking as if somehow the Scratch Foundation is some background organization…

Exascerbescence wrote:

codubee wrote:

Exascerbescence wrote:

snip

Lets back up here:

The first reference is “some moderators didn't know” with a link. Only, nothing of the kind is shown there. It's a back and forth that showed the moderator didn't catch that it was the ToS being referenced in their reply, they realize that and post a link to it. Did they say they didn't know about it? Nope.

As for cheddargirl's statement, hyperbole gets the best of everyone. I can assure you that the ToS changes did not arrive behind the Scratch Team's back. The Scratch Team _wrote_ them with the guidance of lawyers. I was there.

Cheddargirl did not try to disprove the first reference, however, and instead directly confirmed that the moderators weren’t told about the TOS changes. Surely if this were not true then they would’ve said that, instead of agreeing and expanding the statement from some moderators to all moderators. And what reason do you have to think they were being hyperbolic?

The Scratch Team _wrote_ them with the guidance of lawyers. I was there.

mingo-gag wrote:

Whatever Scratch is planning with the AI, just note that it will be better than whatever the Heck is happening here.