On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 05:45:50 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman wrote:

> vallor <vallor@vallor.earth> wrote:
>
>>Hello,
>
>>Is there a newsgroup where people
>>are discussing AI prompts and results? (Such
>>as: GPT4, DALL-E2, Bard, and so forth?)
>
>>Thinking that, somewhere on the Usenet, there must be a
>>discussion. comp.ai is moderated, and everywhere else
>>on comp.ai seems inappropriate. Wondered if there might be
>>an alt group.
>
>>Or if not, maybe we (tinw) can just pick an unused group
>>and post the prompt/result traffic there? (Beats me,
>>thought I'd ask...)
>
>>Thanks,
>
> There's always alt.comp.misc or comp.misc.
>
> comp.ai.* is a hierarchy. They aren't all moderated.
>
> comp.ai Artificial Intelligence. (Moderated)
> comp.ai.alife Research about artificial life.
> comp.ai.doc-analysis.misc General document understanding
technologies.
> comp.ai.doc-analysis.ocr OCR research, algorithms and software.
> comp.ai.edu Applications of Artificial Intelligence to
Education.
> comp.ai.fuzzy Fuzzy set theory, aka fuzzy logic.
> comp.ai.games Artificial intelligence in games and
> game-playing.
> comp.ai.genetic Genetic algorithms in computing.
> comp.ai.nat-lang Natural language processing by computers.
> comp.ai.neural-nets All aspects of neural networks.
> comp.ai.philosophy Philosophical aspects of Artificial Intelligence.
> comp.ai.shells Expert systems and other artificial
intelligence shells.
> comp.ai.vision Artificial Intelligence Vision Research.
(Moderated)

Thank you. comp.ai.shells looks like a good match, except I'm
not sure how interested they'd be with the io. But unless otherwise
directed, I'll see how that works.

Thank you.

fu2: news.groups

--
-v
(Scott)

vallor wrote:

> comp.ai.shells looks like a good match, except I'm
> not sure how interested they'd be with the io.

I expect they're all too busy pining for the fjords ...

Tease'n'Seize <tease-and-seize@invalid> wrote:

> vallor wrote:
>
> > comp.ai.shells looks like a good match, except I'm
> > not sure how interested they'd be with the io.
>
> I expect they're all too busy pining for the fjords ...

Have they fallen off the perch?

--
^Ï^. – Sn!pe – My pet rock Gordon just is.

<https://youtu.be/_kqytf31a8E>

On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 21:30:29 +0100, Sn!pe wrote:

> Tease'n'Seize <tease-and-seize@invalid> wrote:
>
>> vallor wrote:
>>
>> > comp.ai.shells looks like a good match, except I'm not sure how
>> > interested they'd be with the io.
>>
>> I expect they're all too busy pining for the fjords ...
>
> Have they fallen off the perch?

It's basically unused, but seems like it fits the bill.

A:
Would comp.ai.shells be an appropriate newsgroup to discuss ChatGPT4?

GPT4:
Yes, comp.ai.shells would be an appropriate newsgroup to discuss ChatGPT4,
as it is a forum for discussing artificial intelligence programming
environments, tools, and shells. ChatGPT4 is a large AI language model
that falls under the artificial intelligence umbrella, so it is relevant
to the interests of the newsgroup's participants.

--
-v

vallor wrote:

> It's basically unused, but seems like it fits the bill.

Yeah, I can't see anyone likely to object if you try to re-purpose a
fried out group ...

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

> vallor wrote:
>
> > It's basically unused, but seems like it fits the bill.
>
> Yeah, I can't see anyone likely to object if you try to
> re-purpose a fried out group ...

I would post "Is this group in use?" and if there is no answer
in a week, use it. If someone with a better claim comes later
to object, decamp to elsewhere. That would offend nobody.

I note that this thread has already been silently crossposted
to c.a.s. Poor form, that, IMHO.

--
^Ï^. – Sn!pe – My pet rock Gordon just is.

<https://youtu.be/_kqytf31a8E>

On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 23:06:53 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

> vallor wrote:
>
>> It's basically unused, but seems like it fits the bill.
>
> Yeah, I can't see anyone likely to object if you try to re-purpose a
> fried out group ...

I hope so, just wanted to be in something close to the "right" group.

"AI" was in a much different state back then...

--
-v

On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 23:46:50 +0100, Sn!pe wrote:

> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>
>> vallor wrote:
>>
>> > It's basically unused, but seems like it fits the bill.
>>
>> Yeah, I can't see anyone likely to object if you try to re-purpose a
>> fried out group ...
>
> I would post "Is this group in use?" and if there is no answer in a
> week, use it. If someone with a better claim comes later to object,
> decamp to elsewhere. That would offend nobody.
>
> I note that this thread has already been silently crossposted to c.a.s.
> Poor form, that, IMHO.

Why so? Seems like it killed two birds with one stone.

(snecked off c.a.s for this post)

--
-v

vallor <vallor@vallor.earth> wrote:
>On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 23:46:50 +0100, Sn!pe wrote:
>>Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>>>vallor wrote:

>>>>It's basically unused, but seems like it fits the bill.

>>>Yeah, I can't see anyone likely to object if you try to re-purpose a
>>>fried out group ...

>>I would post "Is this group in use?" and if there is no answer in a
>>week, use it. If someone with a better claim comes later to object,
>>decamp to elsewhere. That would offend nobody.

>>I note that this thread has already been silently crossposted to c.a.s.
>>Poor form, that, IMHO.

>Why so? Seems like it killed two birds with one stone.

>(snecked off c.a.s for this post)

What does that have to do with failing to make an explicit statement "I
added a newsgroup to the crosspost" to give the user writing the
followup a head's up?

You're having a meta discussion in one newsgroup. You don't need it to
be crossposted. You've been advised. If you want to let people know that
you're starting AI discussion in the other newsgroup, then do so.

At the moment, there's no activity in the other newsgroup, so there's
no purpose to a meta discussion in that newsgroup. Just start on-topic
discussion without further discussion about discussion.

On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 15:35:44 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman wrote:

> vallor <vallor@vallor.earth> wrote:
>>On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 23:46:50 +0100, Sn!pe wrote:
>>>Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>>>>vallor wrote:
>
>>>>>It's basically unused, but seems like it fits the bill.
>
>>>>Yeah, I can't see anyone likely to object if you try to re-purpose a
>>>>fried out group ...
>
>>>I would post "Is this group in use?" and if there is no answer in a
>>>week, use it. If someone with a better claim comes later to object,
>>>decamp to elsewhere. That would offend nobody.
>
>>>I note that this thread has already been silently crossposted to c.a.s.
>>>Poor form, that, IMHO.
>
>>Why so? Seems like it killed two birds with one stone.
>
>>(snecked off c.a.s for this post)
>
> What does that have to do with failing to make an explicit statement "I
> added a newsgroup to the crosspost" to give the user writing the
> followup a head's up?

You're right, I did do that, and I should have said something. Sorry
about that.

>
> You're having a meta discussion in one newsgroup. You don't need it to
> be crossposted. You've been advised. If you want to let people know that
> you're starting AI discussion in the other newsgroup, then do so.
>
> At the moment, there's no activity in the other newsgroup, so there's no
> purpose to a meta discussion in that newsgroup. Just start on-topic
> discussion without further discussion about discussion.

Sounds good, thank you for your candor.

--
-v

vallor <vallor@vallor.earth> wrote:

[Sn!pe]
> > I note that this thread has already been silently crossposted to c.a.s.
> > Poor form, that, IMHO.
> >
>
> Why so? Seems like it killed two birds with one stone.
>
> (snecked off c.a.s for this post)
>
It's rude to trick people into posting somewhere they didn't intend.
I've seen your apology later in the thread, no need to respond to this.
--
^Ï^. – Sn!pe – My pet rock Gordon just is.

<https://youtu.be/_kqytf31a8E>