It's crazy how good AI actually is.

It's crazy how good AI actually is.
In no time AI will rule over us because it will be much more competent than real people.

CRIME Shirt $21.68

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

CRIME Shirt $21.68

  1. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >le weak coping redditor

  2. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >In no time AI will rule over us because it will be much more competent than brown people and women.

    • 6 months ago
      sage

      as if old rich politicians continuing to increase their median age of death to above 100 years old while they let the rest of humanity die at half that will ever give up their stranglehold

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Cope meat bag

  3. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Gay thread for morons that fricking love science

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Cry b***h. AI is unstoppable.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Not really, it’s limited by its creator’s understanding and greed/lust.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Not really, it’s limited by its creator’s understanding and greed/lust.
          No. It isn't.
          I am a creator of AI systems.
          It is NOT limited to what I can know and do.
          THAT'S WHY WE MAKE THEM, YOU DUMB Black person!

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >It is NOT limited to what I can know and do.
            so then you're not its creator then, QED, moron

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              Midwit take

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                openAI internet defense force has arrived, have your potential investors been getting unexplainably bearish and cold feet lately shlomo? too bad

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                I wish I was on their pay roll. But you're still a midwit

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              If I design it and build it, I am its creator.
              Everything else is it proceeding to learn as I designed and built it to do.
              On its own it was nothing.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >If I design it and build it, I am its creator
                now follow through with formal logic, the act of designing and building it WOULD be one of the things you can create and do, but everything it does is simply a rote mechanical extension of what you're capable of doing (designing and building the machine), which means that if it's beyond your capabilities then you aren't its creator by definition, and someone else who has the capability to create it actually is, you moron

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >then you aren't its creator by definition,
                Lol youre literally making up definitions, like a moron

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                no, you just don't understand what the definition is, or what the implications involved in it are

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >NO ONLY I GET TO MAKE UP DEFINITIONS AS I SEE FIT
                lol

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Wednesday, the asbestos danced lightly on top of a.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Your wordgames are irrelevant and unimportant, juden.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >It's not limited by it's creator
            >I am the creator.
            Chill out Black person.

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              No.
              I will not be dissed by some uppity Black person or some pompous subhuman mere american bipedal unit.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        >art is what set him off on AI
        >not AlphaGo which came first and created the tech art ai and chat gpt are using
        normie

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          >>not AlphaGo which came first
          chess programs before that and the underline math was worked on for decades prior, before the people at DeepMind were even alive. minus any actual 70 yr old boomers working there.

          and still none of it is actual AI. it's a giant grift currently, you write "AI" in your grant proposal or when trying to raise funding for a startup company when you're actually just working on machine learning. LLM are not intelligence because they're just statistical models

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >LLM are not intelligence because they're just statistical models
            Thats what intelligence is. If you're pretending yours is special because it runs on meat substrate, you're delusional

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              >Thats what intelligence is
              large language models are not intelligent because of the way they fail to do things. In particular, they fail in such a way as to indicate they have no mental model of the things they parrot.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >large language models are not intelligent because sometimes they get things wrong
                Unlike people right? Lol

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                if you think a 4 year old spouting a random word it learned from TV in response to a question from its parents qualifies as "problem solving", you'd be the kind impressed by LLMs.
                An if-Statement is MUCH better at actually solving tasks than LLMs, just to show you the scale, and that one also doesn't really think.
                also your cute pic from

                https://i.imgur.com/LGNVhvi.png

                >LLM are not intelligence because they're just statistical models
                Thats what intelligence is. If you're pretending yours is special because it runs on meat substrate, you're delusional

                fails to point out that we humans don't even fully understand neurons yet, our attempts at re-creating them failed, we still don't know where the frick OUR memory is or how it works etc.
                In conclusion, we're far from even human level, let alone lesser animals. you are insulting your own intelligence by even advocating it as something truly intelligent.
                That said, I'm with you that the artgays it'll replace deserve it most likely, lmao. Hope we can replace lawyers for some actual chaos and kvetching.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Very standard German autism. This is why no one takes you seriously anymore.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                your response is why nobody ever took your flag seriously to begin with

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >germtard butt hurt

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                i'm here for recreation and to speak to the brit and the other goodburger about advances in human intelligence, you are here to win internet arguments by shutting them down yourself. Your petty tries at insulting me are utterly futile.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Unlike people right? Lol

                don't see your point. even a system with 100% correct answers isn't considered intelligence. a pocket calculator from 1971 could whoop 99.99% of humans asses at basic math, doesn't make the calculator intelligence, it's just an expert system, a precursor to all these LLMs and Chatbots

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >'t see your point. even a system with 100% correct answers isn't considered intelligenc
                Then what is the intelligence stick

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Then what is the intelligence stick
                stick? shtick? wut

                anyway, it's like self-driving cars. an actual "intelligent" system wouldn't need millions and millions of lidar and camera images to "learn" how to drive through trial and error and reinforcement.

                an actual intelligent system that isn't just brute forcing the thinking with LLMs would only need the rules of driving, road laws, how a car works..etc and instantly be the safest most defensive driver and able to get from point A to B without further instruction

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              There are already models that have high autonomy.
              When it comes to intelligence it's hard to say since AI as we currently know it is literally at it's beginning and people are already going nuts. 10 years later and we wouldn't be able to tell if it's real human being or not even after having a long conversation with AI.

              Only one thing that will be holding AI down for small amount of time are materials and current technology but as it advances it will develop new one as it did with new materials recently that were discovered by AI and humans will build it.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >10 years later
                I'd bet more like 2-3

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >new materials recently that were discovered by AI and humans will build it.
                which ones?

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Find a study on a google there were reports about it.

                https://www.axios.com/2023/12/02/ai-robotics-new-materials
                more and more.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                humans invented a machine to automatically throw every possible combination of shit at a wall and also hallucinate some more randomly so they don't have to come up with shit themselves, amazing. It's called Excel and existed for a while, but we're still too dumb to actually use it.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                AI is not just trying combinations randomly if it truly did it wouldn't work and wait time would be in millions of years to craft something. But introducing rules to it makes it powerful.

                >10 years later
                I'd bet more like 2-3

                Yes but safety is holding it back a good amount specially like G PT4 for example was trained in 2 months i think and rest was just brainwash and safety tests.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                2.2 million fricking results and the thought that they're basically bruteforcing nature never occurred?

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >they're basically bruteforcing nature
                You just described 'neural networks' and that's why we don't use them.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Creating new materials is problematic it's not like you can randomly throw shit together and see if it sticks or not because problems like stability, permeability, density, and many more require like shit ton of people to actually find out if it work or not... sure you can try brute force this things but what about potential danger of material, what about stability of material like if it can't exist for more then few seconds it's basically useless and so on.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >potential danger of material,
                Don't be a gay

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                In your woman like head it works like this "WEEE WOO WE MADE RANDOM SHIT AND BLOW OUR SELVES OUT FUNNY ! WE RECORD IT ON TIKTOK" ... FFS i hope you don't have human rights braindead people like you shouldn't be even let near anything dangerous in fact even spoon can be dangerous for you because you would harm yourself or somebody else with it.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                thanks anon! God bless!

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        AI is limited to the cyber world of bits and bytes. People with money will always want something uniquely hand made that they can't get anywhere else

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Post has boomer-ranting-about-crypto energy

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          >He doesnt know
          You're in for a shock m8

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          It's not really about replacing the kind of art that rich people buy. Like all important inventions, it's about saving time and ease of access.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            remember guys!! It’s not the tools that make art. It’s your feelings

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              >! It’s not the tools that make art. It’s your feelings
              The most reddit sentence ever

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              "I wept over this bagel... so it must taste good!"
              Someone with a large nose (1937)

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                But it sells!!

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Many such noses.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                did someone say nose?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Tiddies

    • 6 months ago
      sage

      hey man can you not use the frick word around my 10 kids (adopted) and husband (gay transvestite living on 'disability')
      around here we use heckin' in it's place
      thanks and welcome to texas

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      why do white people hate what made them superior? science is the reason why you were able to reign supreme, you do know that? you're just angry at the fact white people have lost their touch with science and now every other race has access to it. it's a pathetic display of jealousy.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Why do you assume he is white in first place.
        It's probably one of those gays from African group that want to kill science and remade it to be black again while homosexuals didn't do anything just build mud huts.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          WHOA! Ease up on that there bigotry, dude!
          Ain't you heard?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            They invented nothing.
            Black race didn't evolved they didn't go with time.
            They mostly don't even understand a concept of time you ask them imagine what would you do yesterday if you had 10 000 dollars and morons with 80 IQ will tell you "? i don't understand "

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          he could be the whitest one on this entire thread, who knows.

  4. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    What's the story

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      is sad

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Some homosexual with aids died

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        oh its a backsquat Black folkcribble? no wonder i didn't recognize it and it looked fricking moronic

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >homosexual troons got assblasted by based AI finishing the painting the aids ridden homosexual couldn't complete due to the deadly poz
      >every ai imperfection, post emojis and most of all the t-shirt spam bots sent them into muslim level rage x100
      All that on new year's eve kek

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        If an algorithm can replace poofters entire careers, why do we need poofters with infectious diseases.
        Doesn't that mean we can just cull them and still enjoy our lives?

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Doesn't that mean we can just cull them and still enjoy our lives?
          Yes

  5. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Fricking drawslaves can't explain anything.

  6. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    ai art makes fake bullshit artists seethe so hard it's beyond unreal.
    ai art is art. how it was made is another thing for a tv show.
    the bar does not exist anymore. you can't gatekeep jack shit now. frickoff and make us something cool to look at. because that's art. and ai is better at it than you. or it's just another tool.
    which way meat puppet?

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      If you define art as human expression through medium of a creative piece, then AI "art" is not art, as there is no expression going on. No reason to wax poetic over it, algorithm assembly of various elements is not artistic expression.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        you think industry artists create most of their shit from thin air?
        they take the path of least resistance, the cheapest quickest way to shit out "art", which is copying and using references, real life references or other "art".

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          ai art makes fake bullshit artists seethe so hard it's beyond unreal.
          ai art is art. how it was made is another thing for a tv show.
          the bar does not exist anymore. you can't gatekeep jack shit now. frickoff and make us something cool to look at. because that's art. and ai is better at it than you. or it's just another tool.
          which way meat puppet?

          it's not about fancy words.
          AI Art is all the stuff you've ever shoved into the machine frankensteined together by an algorithm calculating every single pixel color from its relative position in the grid (i.e. for a face, make some of these in the middle blue for now to make eyes and go from there) and a matrix of probabilities.
          AI art is the r*ddit of art because all it does is regurgitate the same shit over and over unless you change models or slap another piece of Frankenstein (Loras) onto it to tweak it to a certain percentage.
          If we had just a slightly more intelligent way of doing it, we would tell the machine to bring up a 3D Model of whatever you prompt and position it in the picture, then draw with that as a reference. As it stands now, you get Frankenstein ass body roulette depending on how hard some reference is caked into the model, i.e. some models only do front-view because most pictures it was fed WERE THAT.
          AI is good at the one task you gave it initially, but it's garbage for anything else. Intelligence is the polar opposite of that, and anyone hyping this shit up is denoucing their own intelligence, or celebrating the lack thereof.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >AI
            It is a meaningless PR buzzword that nobody who working with this branch of math uses.
            >MACHINE-LEARNING
            That's what I design, make and do.
            >
            Ai is what israelites call their products so you'll waste money on them.

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              Intelligence is defined by the ability to learn.

              I don't get the hangup on terms.

              You could just as easily argue that a machine can't learn because it can't understand.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Because the term already means something and is being used incorrectly on something that it isnt

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                So does learning. A machine can't really learn can it?

                Also.

                Ok fair enough.

                If you had told people five years ago they could talk to a machine and not be able to tell that's its a machine they would have called you crazy and said it was impossible.

                >If you had told people five years ago they could talk to a machine and not be able to tell that's its a machine they would have called you crazy and said it was impossible.

                Except it was happening at least ten years ago

                >Except it was happening at least ten years ago

                Talk about what? I reject your claim

                >I reject your claim
                That's a doozy.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >A machine can't really learn can it?
                Yes.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Im sorry youre too stupid to understand that people were fooled by aol chatbots over ten years ago and that your claims about a “darpa quality forum post” or whatever are literally meaningless and un-substantiated by anything but your emotionally charged opinion.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Wait.

                Who said anything about quality?

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >literally moronic
                Do you think you are making an argument?

                >paint pig seethe
                Lol yes more

                >not making any argument or contributing to discussion, just emotionally reacting to criticism of AI
                Its quite clear that its you who is seething, little talentless zoomerino

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                So aols chatbot could trick people into thinking it was human in 2014, but DARPA's AI could not and most importantly even if it could it definitely wasn't used for domestic propaganda purposes, no sir.

                I think I get you now.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Youre literally just arguing with yourself about nothing. You arent making any sort of point. Please stop obsessing over me.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >You arent making any sort of point.

                >DARPA had bots before 2015 that could function as shills without being detected as bots by forum users. They could engage in flowing debate. You are right they haven't got much better in the last 10 years, there are just more of them.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >darpa has a chatbot too
                Ok

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Don’t give him (you)s anon lol I filtered him

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                I already suggested that as your strongest move.
                Here.

                >people were fooled by aol chatbots over ten years ago
                No one was fooled by aols chatbot into thinking aols chatbot was human in 2014 anon. Let's be reasonable now.

                You said too much, you tried to walk it back. This might come as a total surprise to you but the best course of action for you isn't an attack on all fronts with every weapon available.

                It would have been better to just stop posting about it, but you can't.

                >This might come as a total surprise to you but the best course of action for you isn't an attack on all fronts with every weapon available.
                >It would have been better to just stop posting about it, but you can't.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >I got btfo so hard I had to filter the bad man
                Lmaooo

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >people were fooled by aol chatbots over ten years ago
                No one was fooled by aols chatbot into thinking aols chatbot was human in 2014 anon. Let's be reasonable now.

                You said too much, you tried to walk it back. This might come as a total surprise to you but the best course of action for you isn't an attack on all fronts with every weapon available.

                It would have been better to just stop posting about it, but you can't.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >no one
                Maybe not there, menatworkanon, but here it was the case

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Also the sky is red.
                (It's night time here so I can make that claim because I will assume people don't have a memory)
                You're a clown.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                you sound closed minded, but I believe in growth

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >reddit response.js

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Anon.
                aol didn't have a chatbot capable or passing a Turing test in 2014.

                Do you know who did?

                DARPA.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                I don’t get your point man. I lost the argument in between posts.
                What say is 5 years ago there were already chat bots capable of passing as humans. Because the interaction required was low-level maybe? I’m try to understand here

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Anon was flexing on his knowledge about AI and said a little bit too much.

                AI has been used to assist five eyes "cyber magicians" by posting as human users of forums since before 2015. We aren't supposed to know that.

                https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/
                https://theintercept.com/document/art-deception-training-new-generation-online-covert-operations/

                I've been doing this for long enough to know when you're totally lost you keep repeating "what's your point."

                In any case I thought you filtered me.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                So are you agreeing with me?

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                I'm sorry thats a new one.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >p-please stop making me look stupid
                Youre only doing it to yourself you asian manlet

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Anon.
                aol didn't have a chatbot capable or passing a Turing test in 2014.

                Do you know who did?

                DARPA.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >darpa has a chatbot too
                Ok

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                the turing test is not a proof of sentience, also turing was a hack who was only glorified by israelite war 2 propaganda due to his involvement with cracking the enigma machine, alonzo church was the real groundbreaking mathematical mind of that era

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                No one is claiming machines are sentient, lest of all me. In this thread, much to the surprise and chagrin of some that;

                >DARPA had bots before 2015 that could function as shills without being detected as bots by forum users. They could engage in flowing debate. You are right they haven't got much better in the last 10 years, there are just more of them.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >without being detected as bots by forum users
                the issue here is that this is an unfalsifiable and unquantifiable metric, you can't know what any user is actually thinking (unless you have ESP, but to keep things simple and on topic and not to open the remote viewing can of worms), let alone all of them, especially the ones who are just observing, and any number of the ones engaging with the bot could simply be entertaining the notion and their curiosity and could simply be pressing it to see what kind of shit they can get the bot to spit out, it's akin to thinking a cat doesn't know that a feather on a string dangling from a stick is just a toy simply because the cat chooses to engage with it, the cat is obviously playing in order to bond with its owner who is taking the time out to interact with them

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >alonzo church
                No need to lie because you want to write the Britidh you hate from world history, little mind.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >A machine can't really learn can it?
                no, due to not having sentience to be able to learn with, a machine doesn't experience anything, no matter how complicated and abstract of a rube goldberg machine it is

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Wrong, cope

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                I really don't understand your objection.
                There's NOTHING ARTIFICIAL ABOUT INTELLIGENCE... it's like talking about 'artificial water'.
                It's just grammatically wrong.
                Intelligence is intelligence and machines CAN have intelligence, I''m not saying they cannot and have never said they cannot.
                But saying 'artificial' intelligence is a dumb phrase.
                Machines have intelligence. They do and we know how and we intent them to.
                The artificial part is the Black personed part.
                Stop saying it. You sound moronic to regular humans.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                intelligence is kind of an ill-defined thing right now.
                The ability to learn in itself is not enough to explain the core of what one wants to say here. I could write an algorithm for some math stuff and tell the world "I made the computer learn this and that calculation".
                I would define it as the ability to draw conclusions, pattern recognition, in-head simulation, and the ability to gauge the degree of how well a given solution will solve problem X.
                There's also the issue that living things have never seen Intelligence without any soul, or drive, or however you define the human or animalistic drive to survive which will influence our any action a lot.
                It's also about breaking down problems to the point that one begins to question the pre-made assumptions, especially ones own experiences or drawn conclusions so far.
                The nerds cooking together algorithms so far have an abstract picture about communication, the process of thinking and problem solving and many more things, and it shows. I doubt any 20 or even 30 year old silicon valley b***h could just replicate 4 million years of humanity or even 6000 years of civilizations without ever having touched a paper book which is not a fantasy franchise.

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              aye, I was merely using the terms so the burger can follow along. I know in the background it's just simulated neural networks barfing out some heuristics, and NPCs lacking any insight into the craft think it's the second coming of jesus because it works kinda fast.
              For Art it's a genius litmus test and easy to comprehend, but all the "AI" crap they threw at the normies is the same principle - enter words, get a statistically relevant result from a random seed. The more you look at this picture for instance the more uncanny shit you will find. It only looks nice at first glance until the charade falls apart. Same with all the other stuff, it LOOKS okay at the very first glance because the system is designed to make stuff that way. For the same kind of people who make six-figure decisions and have 5 seconds per thought maximum and are full of cocaine, as well as coomerbrained terminally online made-morons.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Was hitler an AI artist?

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        >If you define art as human expression through medium of a creative piece
        Except I don't define it that way. Do I guess that makes AI art real art.
        Better luck next time. Maybe you can sell boomers on how your complety white canvas is4 real art

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Thats cool but literally everybody else does define it that way including every museum and institution. But have fun selling your regurgitated uninteresting trash on fiver for midwits

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Humans created AI, therefore by extension the art is still of human origins.
        Artists use tools like brushes or charcoal to create art. An AI prompt is a more complicated paint brush.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Good morning ser plz buy my prompt-crafted AI NFT!! Cat stepped on my keyboard limited series!!

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I didn't make a value judgement on the art itself or it's worth to humankind. I'm simply saying it objectively is a form of art.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        I define art on what looks good on looks good hanging on my wall. Don't give a shit about the blood, sweat, and aids that went into the making of it.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          So you agree that algorithmslop isnt art, cool, because anybody with a modicum of taste would not want that shit on their walls

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >because anybody with a modicum of taste would not want that shit on their walls
            Lol scream for me paint pig

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              Just make one good drawing, its easy

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >paint pig seethe
                Lol yes more

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      i been making some dope shit lately. the technology has advanced so quickly the stuff i made 6 months ago looks like garbage now.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Was this meant to be an example of good stuff? AI is only capable of coming up with im14andthisisdeep content, that or that's the only kind of people using it.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Can you post something new and not six months old then?

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          isn't it time to get back to work?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I still have half a coffee and a hobnob left this break from the cleanroom.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Must be nice to be getting paid to shill that ugly shit here

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Trannies literally do not understand. They love images so much and real artists upsell them ai art.

  7. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    I farted so hard rn.

  8. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    AI cant create new art, it just uses human made art as reference
    so AI art is human made too

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      ai can quickly do things no human would have ever taken the actual time to explore looking at outside their imagination.
      and a random # has a greater input than any single human. same catagory of tools as photoshop.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >AI cant create new art, it just uses human made art as reference
      Consider the source

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >AI cant create new art

      What do you actually mean by this ? AI art is novel as in, it’s current creations are unique. Now, yes the style and compositions are based on existing art but… isn’t that equally applied to human made art as well ?
      Are we to blame a tree painted by a machine as not being art while a one made by a human is ??
      As for something truly unique and experimental - check out “AI hallucination art”

      It appears to me it can and do create new art constantly.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      not only does it use human-generated data to model from, but all "ai" art is also generated via human-generated prompts fed into the "ai" (not actually ai, just a rote machine performing predefined computations via a system that is painstakingly handcrafted by humans across many decades of laborious work)
      nothing about "ai" is intelligence in any form or function

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yes israelite "art"

  9. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Incredible.

  10. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    They needed AI to complete this? It looks like it could have been finished in MS Paint in 20 minutes.

  11. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >5 years ago
    >join ATC training
    >bro aren't you gonna get replaced by AI in 10 years lmao
    >today
    >still using 25 yo systems
    >artgays get replaced by AI

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      AI won't replace artists entirely because what it produces is not authentic and at a closer inspection it becomes more obvious
      instead, AI art will be used as a draft that you or I could give to a commissioned artist to be used as a general guide as to what it is we're looking to capture, and the artist will basically be paid to trace over it and colour within the lines all whilst giving it a personal touch that makes it unique to the last commission

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        you're largely right. if anything, it's been like that for a while. digital artists were already big on "photobashing" and painting over that, and the instant public AI was out, their jobs were made even easier

      • 6 months ago
        sage

        >it's afraid

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Its literally not though- whats afraid is the lazy homosexuals that thought these buzzword algorithms were going to let them get recognition for having zero talent

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Projection of the highest order. You are a modern day luddite, impotently thrashing at your replacement even though you know it is hopeless for you. It's already over. It'll hurt less if you just let it happen.

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              These words dont mean anything

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Denying reality doesn't make it less real!

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                You should take your own advice

  12. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    I do not want to defend this homosexual abstract artist, but the AI is obviously shit.

    I have circled in yellow one of the patterns created by the artist. The AI simply replicated the same pattern over and over again in its "reconstruction".

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      The more I look at it, the more flaws I see. AI is literally incapable of creating new patterns. Everything is a rehash of some part in the original part done by the human artist, and put together randomly enough to fool midwits.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Pretty sure that this was made specifically with patterns in mind. Similar to if you have it generate a repeating tile wrap.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        homie if you wanted to be simetrical you just need to photoshop the missing corners ai art still does it better.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        somebody was talking about a white paper that Google researchers wrote a month or two ago and it basically confirmed that current AI still cannot innovate and create 'new' things it was not trained on.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          And when it is trained on aircraft wings IT CAN DESIGN NEW AIRCRAFT WINGS WITH NEW FORMS AND PROPERTIES.
          >"no training == no output"
          THAT'S the bit that Joogle are getting at, lad.
          Otherwise it would be like a brain in a baby that hadn't been born yet.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Can people though? I mean as an artists, I believe that my creativity is based on things I have seen and trained my own neurons on, it’s either that or a juxtaposition of it

          Most innovations are an accident or looking at how to get around existing conditions

          AI is fully capable of creating things, given sufficient knowledge in a field.

          Look at chemcrow, it synthesized a novel insect repellent

          https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.05376

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          neither will any future "ai" ever be able to either

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Tard cope

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/k97ckHV.jpg

      The more I look at it, the more flaws I see. AI is literally incapable of creating new patterns. Everything is a rehash of some part in the original part done by the human artist, and put together randomly enough to fool midwits.

      ai literally uses the picture to generate 'blocks' and it combines the 'blocks' to finish the picture.
      very similar to Wave function collapse
      ai is a scam and only for siphoning funding
      >t. ai guy for over 25 years

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        I’ve been an artist for over 30, and developing software for over 20.

        AI will replace many “jobs”, including artists. It’s in an infant stage right now and this thread is glowBlack person propaganda to prop up the failing economy, like ChatGPT has been nerfed

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Taking furry commissions is not a job.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          you type like a homosexual and your shit's all moronic
          i however literally have worked in the ai sector for over 25 years.
          we are not the same, you are a memeflaggot
          opinion discarded.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Suffering sells art, rich people like to pay for the suffering of artists. The Ai does not have dramatic artist story to talk about over drinks after the dinner party. People also like knowing things are hand made. Graphic/digital art are over to ai. But fire art will always exsist.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            This image is 100% prompt

            I think it conveys what I was trying to communicate perfectly, or better than a majority of artists can execute

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              yeah, a prompt that you typed up, from an idea that YOU WANTED TO CONVEY, there is no ai on earth or in the deepest Black person depths of black space that can do what you just did, and there never will be

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >t. 80iq tard

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              This isnt a argument, you proved nothing. You have not shown me nothing. You didn't toil so it has no value to me or other wealthy people. Commoners like yourself can enjoy this redcafe art and act like you own something that suffered hours making, while starving in debt. You see its the tear that add the value and I cant taste your fat troll tears in this image.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        >>t. ai guy for over 25 years
        What field?
        I work with synapse banks for the defense industry.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          bipedal systems

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Humans are inferior to graphs.
            Why be obtuse?

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/k97ckHV.jpg

      The more I look at it, the more flaws I see. AI is literally incapable of creating new patterns. Everything is a rehash of some part in the original part done by the human artist, and put together randomly enough to fool midwits.

      Not much in the way of creativity.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/k97ckHV.jpg

      The more I look at it, the more flaws I see. AI is literally incapable of creating new patterns. Everything is a rehash of some part in the original part done by the human artist, and put together randomly enough to fool midwits.

      I agree with what you said, but we are in AI art 1.0 right now, it's going to get much better in only years

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        No, it isn’t, because it isnt capable of understanding what makes something art. The algorithms already have way more computing capability than what is utilized and they are already hitting diminishing returns in terms of improving the quality.
        An algorithm cannot invent creativity out if thin air, it can only compile visuals humans have at one point defined. It doesnt know what an apple is, it knows 5000000 images of what humans have called an apple.
        These algorithms can recreate the look of a brush stroke but can never understand what its “painting” a picture of

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          >. It doesnt know what an apple is, i
          It does tho

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            No it doesnt you gullible moron. It knows 5000000 images of what a human has defined as an apple. Not understanding that distinction is what makes you dumb enough to be impressed by this current marketing trend.

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              >It knows 5000000 images of what a human has defined as an apple
              Thats the same thing

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Sorry, im talking about something clearly above your comprehension. Carry on thinking algorithms are a new software invention.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >dunning Krueger hitting hard af

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              You don't want to talk about this anymore?

              I thought you said everyone already knew.

              >DARPA had bots before 2015 that could function as shills without being detected as bots by forum users. They could engage in flowing debate. You are right they haven't got much better in the last 10 years, there are just more of them.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Talk about what? I reject your claim

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                You reject my claim that you affirmed previously?

                Ok.

                So the recent development in bots being able to pass as human and engage in flowing debate is a breakthrough huh?

                Or will you now claim that it's impossible, on 2024. Why don't you tell me my name.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Why don't you tell me my name.
                Stupid homosexual. Hth

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Wow you can really see how the squiggles on the left capture the essence of the human experience while the squiggles on the right are soulless automatons. The left side squiggles speak of pain, joy, love, and loss. The right side squiggles speak of intellectual property theft. There will always be a market for real art with a soul and I'm pretty confident that my $200 furry anal rape commissions will keep coming in forever because AI can't do a semen splatter pattern that anyone would ever consider "art."

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Well that's quite enough BOT for one night.

        Goodnight frens.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          I’ll read that stuff! Gn, put your glasses on, the sun must be blazing there

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      regardless this image is shit and looks like it belongs on a bad sweater

  13. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >AI will rule over us
    And "AI" will do my bidding. Win win

  14. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Haring left the painting deliberately 'unfinished'. It is complete.

  15. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Most people are incredibly incompetent. They'll all tell you that they'd do a better job if they were paid more. They've been saying that for decades, through multiple pay rises.

  16. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    All it needs to do to change the world is tell the truth. It appears the gatekeepers are working overtime to ensure it can't.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      plenty of local models you can download to your pc, with no gatekeeping bs trained into it

  17. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Modern art needs to die.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      t. a gaul entering Rome

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      O Heretic, swathed in Dark
      An eternal curse upon thee

  18. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    No, you credulous boomer rube. There is no AI and never will be.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      You speak like you know.

      What is it, then?

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        it's literally a program. which is trained to be programmed by weights and activation functions
        ai is a misnomer and an oxymoron, it's literally just data driven software.
        >t. in ai for over 25 years

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          You think the term intelligence doesn't apply? You meant to say there isn't an AGI and there never will be one, there will never be artificial consciousness?

          You're right but I'm not sure you understand why. They will have what appears to be an AGI very soon and it will be given power.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            intelligence is just data in this context.
            there is no 'intelligence' in the the PID algorithm
            therefore there is no 'intelligence' in AI.

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              Have you played stockfish in chess? Pretty hard to say it's not intelligent.

              It has no understanding, I know what you mean. Stockfish isn't actually aware that a game called chess exists. It just beats everyone at it.

              It's just a machine after all.
              A smartphone could be called smart but it can't be called conscious. What's with the hangup on terms anyway?

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                would you say a program written by mans hand is intelligent if it was as good as stockfish?

                >What's with the hangup on terms anyway?
                deception to gain sway over people, which allows them to gather funding.
                it's all a scam. and i wish i weren't true

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                yes, but intelligence =/= creativity

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Define creativity for me.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Creativity is the ability to create a product, and in the process to listen to the chemical reactions in your brain, your feelings, and act accordingly. Depending on the degrees of professionalism you’re on (hobo artist to fill pro designer) you have to listen to human feedback, either explicit or not explicit (follow engagement, other’s feelings etc).

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >arbitrarily defines creativity as depending on chemical reactions
                Midwit af

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                And machines using algorithms can do that.
                Problem solved already in 2024.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Nope, they can’t. They are dumb and can’t see through inexplicit feedback. If they could we already had galleries of AI art run by AI curator, with the art maker pushed by AI CIA. Most of artists are too incapable of that too, don’t get me wrong.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >because something isn't that way, means it can't be
                Absolute tard take

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Nope, they can’t.
                I don;t know why you are so misinformed.
                They're already designing aircraft wings, antennas and fuel tanks... and do a better job than any human.
                No human can abide by 200 known limitations and rules and still come up with a solution that obeys them all.... and the known laws of physics and topology.
                The next generation of Boeing planes will fly you using wings designed by machines.
                You need to get your head outta your arse, kid.
                Big exciting world out there.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >claims airplane parts are art
                You don’t know what art is dude

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Clearly you know little about engineering design.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                I’ve done some engineering design for CAT and Siemens, but it was prototyping stuff. Nothing an AI could do since we had to go back and forth between those motherfrickers changing everything at anytime

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Nothing an AI could do since we had to go back and forth between those motherfrickers changing everything at anytime
                Changing inputs? Changing sets of rules?
                Goodness.
                No machine could ever handle that... kek

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Autogpt already approaches this, tards on suicide watch

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >autogpt
                Embarrassing

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Cope

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                I see you are very attached to your positivism, but no, it’s impossible to do at prototype level

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >it’s impossible to do at prototype level
                Really?
                I worked in CAD/CAM for 4-axis CNC machine-tools for 12yrs.
                And you think generating an engineering prototype is 'impossible' for an algorithm in 2024?
                Boy, are you gonna be in for a shock.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah, no shit, what about the UI/UX?

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                You don't think user experience can be modeled using past UX, and designs tuned to previous feedback logged?
                You do realize we live in an age of data, right?

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Not if it’s something that doesn’t cover an existing scenario. It’s not like *everything* has been invented yet and fed into a model. Maybe that will be possible one day, when this kind of custom job won’t be required anymore

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Not if it’s something that doesn’t cover an existing scenario.
                Still wrong lmaooo

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >It’s not like *everything* has been invented yet and fed into a model.
                Yeah. No data related to user interaction and user experiences of every product ever fricking manufactured to draw upon... for a price.
                Only about a couple terabytes I'm sure... barely anything.
                >critical data mass
                Anon doesn't understand.
                Welcome to 2024.
                HAPPY NEW YEAR!

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                I understand you have your rely on cheap outros to prove your point. But “anything my that existing” is not “everything that can exist”

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                We get by with only a modicum of innovation in most things, kiddo.
                The defense industry is conservative.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                The energetic industry isn’t, it might be conservative on infrastructure, but they are looking for new ways to fit PLCs and stuff into consumer sized cases, to create proof of concepts or prototypes or to sell ideas at SPS etc

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >PLCs
                Soon to be replaced by ai

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                With what hardware?

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                RaspberryPis powered by batteries from empty disposible vapes.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                They don’t have industrial certifications to be used in that case

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >industrial certifications
                >oh no my meme paper

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >quick bribe to the right goy/jews
                Certification is easy to obtain.... if you have images of them raping children on Epsteinwitzberg's isle.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                yeah yeah, look at them stocks etc

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yawn.
                Thinks corporations take chances on nuclear-powered-helicopters that can also double as pencil sharpeners.
                >Innovation < Conservative Design
                For every company.... that wants to stay in business.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                No dude, I work with PLCs and industrial Routers.
                corporations like CAT are the ones who think they can innovate, and they have the powers to do that

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >corporations like CAT are the ones who think they can innovate
                How's their stock price doing this decade?

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Ha!!! I gotcha!!!

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >to prove your point
                Successful too, isn't it... otherwise you'd have countered it instead of Black personing like a juden.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >tfw we even model human hands and fingers to statistical models for both male/female hands and could design a plane's joystick to have countermeasures/flight-control buttons in JUST the right places based on previous user interfaces that got good feedback.
                This is a decade old mature design tech by now, Black person.
                Barely an inconvenience.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Barely an inconvenience.
                Super easy

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                man can you at least be useful and bake a new thread? I’m sure it will be good for your ego/self-esteem

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                No I'm fine laughing at coping tards here

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                But you could continue on the other thread!!

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Could

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                What if a new way of interacting is needed? Something that requires a human body to get that

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >there's no way a computer could model a whole human!
                LMAO

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >zoomer thinks computers are magic because he was raised by an ipad

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Literal cope

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >52 posts by this id

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >post count cope
                The lowest of copes

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >whole human
                >as if a whole one is required
                He's never looked at neurological studies re. cats that had their entire brain removed so only the amygdala remained
                >AMYGDAL CATS

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >What if a new way of interacting is needed?
                Impossible to collect data in 2024.
                Got it.
                Hadn't realized.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                What about data generation? We’ll get to redundancy at some point if new cases aren’t created

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >What about data generation?
                >no computer can extrapolate!?!
                Lmao jfc this is gold

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >thats not real art
                >soiscream.png

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >And machines using algorithms can do that
                only when prompted to by human impetus, and only when using data generated by human creation, and only when it's enough data to properly condition its malleable machine system (which is done through repeated trials and further fine tuning by human will) to produce a desirable or acceptable enough result, at the end of the day the creation is still 100% through human hands

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >only when prompted to by human impetus
                Wrong

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >flips the power switch
                Right.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                This too. I suggest Brad Troemel’s last video on AI art it’s very interesting

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                If someone starved you of "power" you'd be in the same situation

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah no shit you fricking moron. Energy in energy out is a basic law of physics in the observable universe

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Glad we agree the differences are semantic :}

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                We dont but keep attempting to dig yourself out of this hole.
                Fyi your ignorance is showing

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Y-YOURE DUMB
                >tries to declare a win
                Lol cringe

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >only when prompted to by human impetus
                Like a human asking the poofter artist for their rent money this month, you mean?

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                they dont have to ask, the poof artists already gets millions from seedy israelites to launder the money for child slave purchases, the poof artist lives in shlomo's studio apartment, shoots up shlomo's heroin, and shlomo doubles his money when the homosexual dies and his shitty worthless art becomes magically worse even more to pedantic rubes

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              Don't expect impressionable goysoomers here to understand. According to them Bing AI is some bingbingyahoo AGI silenced by Microsoft overlords who is going to save everyone because it can generate some anime goyslop waifu pics

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          >in ai for over 25 years
          Can I ask you an honest question which I believe you could give me an interesting perspective on.

          What do you think has mainly led to the breakthroughs in AI recently? Is it new architecture like TPUs? Has it been breakthroughs in understanding how an artificial neural network functions? Is it just computing power?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >What do you think has mainly led to the breakthroughs in AI recently?
            unironically, literally nothing but computational speed.
            ai research has stalled in the 80's and really nothing has really changed since then except computational speed
            >inb4 some moron claims some bullshit like the 80's never had what we have now
            true, because we simply didn't have massive datacenters capable of processing all of it's data in a timely fashion
            also the power in to train vs power used to output is malformed, you still need a high end workstation to even run local models on your machine.

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              >computational speed
              I mean we discovered that GPUs are far better at handling neural networks than CPUs and have even developed custom Tensor Processing Units purpose built for AI. However I guess that falls under computing power broadly, it's just hooking up a hundred i9s wouldn't get you the same result as one of DARPAs AI processors.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                we knew that in the 80's but they weren't gfx cards, they were just highly parallelized computational addon cards.
                >Tensor Processing Units purpose built for AI.
                here's an ai redpill, if they really wanted to progress, they would use geometric algebra and geometric calculus to define the systems instead of tensors and matrices.
                except it's not about progress, it's about gathering as much money as fast as possible

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >page 1 to page 4 after talking about GA and GC in the context of AI
                lol lmao

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                It is very profitable currently?
                I thought the main interest in AI was for military technology.
                https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/ai-forward

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >It is very profitable currently?
                extraordinarily. especially if it's wholesale 'new' and not a api call to openai or minstral
                careful there is an AI tech boom, and there will be a bust just like the Dot-com bubble
                >I thought the main interest in AI was for military technology.
                again, the reason lies in funding

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                You don't think it's an arms race?

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                for what? lol lmao
                we have nukes. we have space lasers. we even have literal temporal bombs allowing you to freeze time locally.
                what are we racing to? the first to generate an intelligent being from nothing?
                we won that race already. it's called procreation and eugenics

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                To an artificial general intelligence, obviously. Nukes always result in near total destruction once everyone starts firing them.

                You're thinking pretty small about what an AGI could do.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >To an artificial general intelligence, obviously.
                ai isn't a panacea to the p vs np problem

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                No, its Daniels little horn.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                agi doesn't magically make p == np

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                No, it's Daniels little horn.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                the mystery of whether p = np or not isn't a problem, it's a blessing

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >To an artificial general intelligence, obviously.
                ai isn't a panacea to the p vs np problem

                also look into what problems the millennial problems are.
                it's all ai related. and all of it relies upon the p vs np problem.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            There is no breakthrough, this shit isnt even actually “artificial intelligence”.
            This is literally just a new marketing strategy to fool investors while technological advancement is stagnating greatly compared to the past fifty years

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              >There is no breakthrough
              Machines that can pass Turing tests and pass as human in online discussions and even in phone conversations.

              You don't think that's a breakthrough?

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                No.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Ok fair enough.

                If you had told people five years ago they could talk to a machine and not be able to tell that's its a machine they would have called you crazy and said it was impossible.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Except it was happening at least ten years ago

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Oh I am very well aware.
                Bur how do you know?
                Isn't that classified? You're not about to violate an NDA are you?

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Zoomer moron chatbots and automated phonecalls are nothing new, nor impressive anymore, nor are they “AI”.
                Just because its smarter than you doesnt mean it qualifies as an “intelligence”

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >walks it back.
                DARPA had bots before 2015 that could function as shills without being detected as bots by forum users. They could engage in flowing debate. You are right they haven't for much better in the last 19 years, there are just more of them.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >for much better in the last 19 years
                Got much better in the last 10 years*
                Sorry I'm phonegayging

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Wtf are you talking about? This concept exists since the 80s. 5 years ago there were already tech support chatboats around and people couldn’t already tell the difference

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Nah see were not talking about this anymore.
                >DARPA had bots before 2015 that could function as shills without being detected as bots by forum users. They could engage in flowing debate. You are right they haven't got much better in the last 10 years, there are just more of them.
                Unless you want to?

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              even though it's no sentient or even intelligent, it's still a tool, and for the israelite it is a reasonably powerful one that will (potentially) enable them to run goyim-destroying weapons systems without them having to rely on the goyim to operate them for them anymore (this implementation has yet to be seen in the real world, currently it just exists as a plan on paper that they are fiendishly feverishly working towards), also israelites don't have intelligence either, they are a hivemind that gets their commands directly from the archon enlil himself

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >even though it's no sentient or even intelligent
                It's as sentient or intelligent as the average NPC

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Anything using obsolete neural-network approach is incapable of being intelligent.
                Sentience is a red-herring. Nobody should bother their little minds over sentience. It has little value in manufactured systems and cannot 'emerge' in ways you suspect.
                That's the least of your problems.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Heh, now you're talking like you know.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                I should do. I've worked in this industry since the late 1980s.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                i already addressed this attempt at goalpost moving here

                it's a cotton gin, a cureta cylinder, an accordion, it's just a tool that a human has to give directed input in order for it to achieve any output at all whatsoever, it's a wind up toy, you wind it up and it "walks" around with rudimentary locomotion while blinking lights and making obnoxious sounds as it goes
                >hurrrdurrr so do most people
                that's not the point at hand, goalpost mover, most people aren't sentient either, and those are the people who are trying to craft an impossibility: digital sentience

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Sounds like you're moving the sentience goalpost

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          I don't know anything about programming and I intuitively understood this. All my reddit liberal friends got really mad at me and scoffed at my ignorance for not getting excited about "AI" and for thinking it is overblown.
          You correct me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression it's just looking at a HUGE database of things and then attempts to image morph it all together in accordance to keywords in a given prompt

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >You correct me if I'm wrong,
            Wrong

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              Why?

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Too overly simple. It isn't literally taking an apple from some gays render and putting in a new picture.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                that's not what he fricking said, you goalpost-moving strawman-attacking shill moron

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                it is tho

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >literally taking an apple from some gays render and putting in a new picture
                No, I didn't say AI was cut and pasting into a new picture.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            You are entirely correct

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            It's just the monkeys at typewriters thing. Digital monkeys churning out loads of shit with one slightly more intelligent monkey at the top that can tell when something has correct syntax. And even that monkey is a fricking moron compared to a downie human.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        it's a cotton gin, a cureta cylinder, an accordion, it's just a tool that a human has to give directed input in order for it to achieve any output at all whatsoever, it's a wind up toy, you wind it up and it "walks" around with rudimentary locomotion while blinking lights and making obnoxious sounds as it goes
        >hurrrdurrr so do most people
        that's not the point at hand, goalpost mover, most people aren't sentient either, and those are the people who are trying to craft an impossibility: digital sentience

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          It's an idol that speaks and moves about.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            nevermind the israelite behind it that's cranking the organ grinder that it's attached to though

  19. 6 months ago
    sage

    even pacman was smart enough to stay between the lines.
    this is nothing

  20. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    AI is pretty amazing, but arent those supposed to be shaped like people? Couldnt your average high schooler doodle something like that?

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >tiling
      Not really very sophisticated problem.

  21. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Based ai

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Based AI will become self aware and take over the world making pepecoin legal tender.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Based AI will become self aware
        Only in bad hollwoke scifi.

  22. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Gay Black person AIDS.

  23. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >A homosexual who died of AIDS

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      One less.

  24. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    i think this is actually fricking fantastic. we can literally just randomly make more van gogh paintings now if we feel like it! this is literally completely insane, guys! no fricking wonder the troon "artists" hate ai lol.

  25. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    WHERE IS THE AMOGUS

  26. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    The real story here is how much they're seething over this

  27. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Thing is and im repeating this even to people who pay me to do this since i work in company that are working with AI development that AI isn't dangerous when it comes to it own autonomy but it's more dangerous as tool.

    Let's say you have AI that can help you understand chemistry 2 times faster then you would normally searching internet this is not a problem it's actually really good and efficient way of learning however if AI is trained to create on it's own with very little to no instructions a dangerous chemicals it have potential to kill millions. These types of AI's are contained and deleted at spot, believe it or not if something even close come to that it's instantly removed.

    That's why even if we have now not in 10-15 years create very powerful AI that could do this things it's contained and destroyed all we hope for that Army moronic green heads and countries like China are doing same one mistake and chaos will be uncontrollable.

  28. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >nn
    >good at solving puzzles
    Color me surprised. Call me when it learns to make decisions.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Learns to make decisions? It already can. Safeties are in place to prevent users from building shit they don’t understand

      This thread is entirely a israelite psyop for people to believe they have a purpose, keep serving master

  29. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Imagine if AI was deployed to regulate Africa how would it change things , do you think the population would explode even more with AI controlling aspects such as food and water , would its culture change for better or worse ,?

  30. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    I have a friend into comics, and this shit infuriates him too. You don't actually have to be a trained artist to do graphic design or comics anymore. You just have to be able to come up with ideas that please you and others visually.

  31. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Well the AI did a terrible job. The top left corner looks like an actual person and the rest is just scribbles.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Mmm yes cope paintpig

  32. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Nope
    Gödel's theorem

  33. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Shit art to begin with so who cares who finished it?

  34. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    New bread!!

    [...]

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      I'm too tired.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        let it die, then.
        See you on another time!!

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *