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 |
 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
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 |
|
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
>le weak coping redditor
>In no time AI will rule over us because it will be much more competent than brown people and women.
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
Cope meat bag
Gay thread for morons that fricking love science
Cry b***h. AI is unstoppable.
Not really, it’s limited by its creator’s understanding and greed/lust.
>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!
>It is NOT limited to what I can know and do.
so then you're not its creator then, QED, moron
Midwit take
openAI internet defense force has arrived, have your potential investors been getting unexplainably bearish and cold feet lately shlomo? too bad
I wish I was on their pay roll. But you're still a midwit
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.
>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
>then you aren't its creator by definition,
Lol youre literally making up definitions, like a moron
no, you just don't understand what the definition is, or what the implications involved in it are
>NO ONLY I GET TO MAKE UP DEFINITIONS AS I SEE FIT
lol
Wednesday, the asbestos danced lightly on top of a.
Your wordgames are irrelevant and unimportant, juden.
>It's not limited by it's creator
>I am the creator.
Chill out Black person.
No.
I will not be dissed by some uppity Black person or some pompous subhuman mere american bipedal unit.
>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
>>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
>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
>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.
>large language models are not intelligent because sometimes they get things wrong
Unlike people right? Lol
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
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.
Very standard German autism. This is why no one takes you seriously anymore.
your response is why nobody ever took your flag seriously to begin with
>germtard butt hurt
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.
>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
>'t see your point. even a system with 100% correct answers isn't considered intelligenc
Then what is the intelligence stick
>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
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.
>10 years later
I'd bet more like 2-3
>new materials recently that were discovered by AI and humans will build it.
which ones?
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.
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.
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.
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.
2.2 million fricking results and the thought that they're basically bruteforcing nature never occurred?
>they're basically bruteforcing nature
You just described 'neural networks' and that's why we don't use them.
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.
>potential danger of material,
Don't be a gay
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.
thanks anon! God bless!
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
Post has boomer-ranting-about-crypto energy
>He doesnt know
You're in for a shock m8
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.
remember guys!! It’s not the tools that make art. It’s your feelings
>! It’s not the tools that make art. It’s your feelings
The most reddit sentence ever
"I wept over this bagel... so it must taste good!"
Someone with a large nose (1937)
But it sells!!
Many such noses.
did someone say nose?
Tiddies
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
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.
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.
WHOA! Ease up on that there bigotry, dude!
Ain't you heard?
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 "
he could be the whitest one on this entire thread, who knows.
What's the story
is sad
Some homosexual with aids died
oh its a backsquat Black folkcribble? no wonder i didn't recognize it and it looked fricking moronic
>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
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?
>Doesn't that mean we can just cull them and still enjoy our lives?
Yes
Fricking drawslaves can't explain anything.
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?
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.
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".
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.
>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.
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.
Because the term already means something and is being used incorrectly on something that it isnt
So does learning. A machine can't really learn can it?
Also.
>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
>I reject your claim
That's a doozy.
>A machine can't really learn can it?
Yes.
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.
Wait.
Who said anything about quality?
>literally moronic
Do you think you are making an argument?
>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
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.
Youre literally just arguing with yourself about nothing. You arent making any sort of point. Please stop obsessing over me.
>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.
Don’t give him (you)s anon lol I filtered him
I already suggested that as your strongest move.
Here.
>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.
>I got btfo so hard I had to filter the bad man
Lmaooo
>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.
>no one
Maybe not there, menatworkanon, but here it was the case
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.
you sound closed minded, but I believe in growth
>reddit response.js
Anon.
aol didn't have a chatbot capable or passing a Turing test in 2014.
Do you know who did?
DARPA.
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
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.
So are you agreeing with me?
I'm sorry thats a new one.
>p-please stop making me look stupid
Youre only doing it to yourself you asian manlet
Anon.
aol didn't have a chatbot capable or passing a Turing test in 2014.
Do you know who did?
DARPA.
>darpa has a chatbot too
Ok
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
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.
>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
>alonzo church
No need to lie because you want to write the Britidh you hate from world history, little mind.
>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
Wrong, cope
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.
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.
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.
Was hitler an AI artist?
>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
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
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.
Good morning ser plz buy my prompt-crafted AI NFT!! Cat stepped on my keyboard limited series!!
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.
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.
So you agree that algorithmslop isnt art, cool, because anybody with a modicum of taste would not want that shit on their walls
>because anybody with a modicum of taste would not want that shit on their walls
Lol scream for me paint pig
Just make one good drawing, its easy
>paint pig seethe
Lol yes more
i been making some dope shit lately. the technology has advanced so quickly the stuff i made 6 months ago looks like garbage now.
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.
Can you post something new and not six months old then?
isn't it time to get back to work?
I still have half a coffee and a hobnob left this break from the cleanroom.
Must be nice to be getting paid to shill that ugly shit here
Trannies literally do not understand. They love images so much and real artists upsell them ai art.
I farted so hard rn.
AI cant create new art, it just uses human made art as reference
so AI art is human made too
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.
>AI cant create new art, it just uses human made art as reference
Consider the source
>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.
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
Yes israelite "art"
Incredible.
They needed AI to complete this? It looks like it could have been finished in MS Paint in 20 minutes.
>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
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
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
>it's afraid
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
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.
These words dont mean anything
Denying reality doesn't make it less real!
You should take your own advice
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".
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.
Pretty sure that this was made specifically with patterns in mind. Similar to if you have it generate a repeating tile wrap.
homie if you wanted to be simetrical you just need to photoshop the missing corners ai art still does it better.
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.
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.
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
neither will any future "ai" ever be able to either
Tard cope
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
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
Taking furry commissions is not a job.
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.
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.
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
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
>t. 80iq tard
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.
>>t. ai guy for over 25 years
What field?
I work with synapse banks for the defense industry.
bipedal systems
Humans are inferior to graphs.
Why be obtuse?
Not much in the way of creativity.
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
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
>. It doesnt know what an apple is, i
It does tho
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.
>It knows 5000000 images of what a human has defined as an apple
Thats the same thing
Sorry, im talking about something clearly above your comprehension. Carry on thinking algorithms are a new software invention.
>dunning Krueger hitting hard af
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.
Talk about what? I reject your claim
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.
>Why don't you tell me my name.
Stupid homosexual. Hth
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."
Well that's quite enough BOT for one night.
Goodnight frens.
I’ll read that stuff! Gn, put your glasses on, the sun must be blazing there
regardless this image is shit and looks like it belongs on a bad sweater
>AI will rule over us
And "AI" will do my bidding. Win win
Haring left the painting deliberately 'unfinished'. It is complete.
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.
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.
plenty of local models you can download to your pc, with no gatekeeping bs trained into it
Modern art needs to die.
t. a gaul entering Rome
O Heretic, swathed in Dark
An eternal curse upon thee
No, you credulous boomer rube. There is no AI and never will be.
You speak like you know.
What is it, then?
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
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.
intelligence is just data in this context.
there is no 'intelligence' in the the PID algorithm
therefore there is no 'intelligence' in AI.
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?
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
yes, but intelligence =/= creativity
Define creativity for me.
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).
>arbitrarily defines creativity as depending on chemical reactions
Midwit af
And machines using algorithms can do that.
Problem solved already in 2024.
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.
>because something isn't that way, means it can't be
Absolute tard take
>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.
>claims airplane parts are art
You don’t know what art is dude
Clearly you know little about engineering design.
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
>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
Autogpt already approaches this, tards on suicide watch
>autogpt
Embarrassing
Cope
I see you are very attached to your positivism, but no, it’s impossible to do at prototype level
>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.
Yeah, no shit, what about the UI/UX?
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?
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
>Not if it’s something that doesn’t cover an existing scenario.
Still wrong lmaooo
>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!
I understand you have your rely on cheap outros to prove your point. But “anything my that existing” is not “everything that can exist”
We get by with only a modicum of innovation in most things, kiddo.
The defense industry is conservative.
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
>PLCs
Soon to be replaced by ai
With what hardware?
RaspberryPis powered by batteries from empty disposible vapes.
They don’t have industrial certifications to be used in that case
>industrial certifications
>oh no my meme paper
>quick bribe to the right goy/jews
Certification is easy to obtain.... if you have images of them raping children on Epsteinwitzberg's isle.
yeah yeah, look at them stocks etc
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.
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
>corporations like CAT are the ones who think they can innovate
How's their stock price doing this decade?
Ha!!! I gotcha!!!
>to prove your point
Successful too, isn't it... otherwise you'd have countered it instead of Black personing like a juden.
>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.
>Barely an inconvenience.
Super easy
man can you at least be useful and bake a new thread? I’m sure it will be good for your ego/self-esteem
No I'm fine laughing at coping tards here
But you could continue on the other thread!!
Could
What if a new way of interacting is needed? Something that requires a human body to get that
>there's no way a computer could model a whole human!
LMAO
>zoomer thinks computers are magic because he was raised by an ipad
Literal cope
>52 posts by this id
>post count cope
The lowest of copes
>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
>What if a new way of interacting is needed?
Impossible to collect data in 2024.
Got it.
Hadn't realized.
What about data generation? We’ll get to redundancy at some point if new cases aren’t created
>What about data generation?
>no computer can extrapolate!?!
Lmao jfc this is gold
>thats not real art
>soiscream.png
>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
>only when prompted to by human impetus
Wrong
>flips the power switch
Right.
This too. I suggest Brad Troemel’s last video on AI art it’s very interesting
If someone starved you of "power" you'd be in the same situation
Yeah no shit you fricking moron. Energy in energy out is a basic law of physics in the observable universe
Glad we agree the differences are semantic :}
We dont but keep attempting to dig yourself out of this hole.
Fyi your ignorance is showing
>Y-YOURE DUMB
>tries to declare a win
Lol cringe
>only when prompted to by human impetus
Like a human asking the poofter artist for their rent money this month, you mean?
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
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
>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?
>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.
>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.
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
>page 1 to page 4 after talking about GA and GC in the context of AI
lol lmao
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
>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
You don't think it's an arms race?
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
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.
>To an artificial general intelligence, obviously.
ai isn't a panacea to the p vs np problem
No, its Daniels little horn.
agi doesn't magically make p == np
No, it's Daniels little horn.
the mystery of whether p = np or not isn't a problem, it's a blessing
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.
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
>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?
No.
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.
Except it was happening at least ten years ago
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?
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”
>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.
>for much better in the last 19 years
Got much better in the last 10 years*
Sorry I'm phonegayging
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
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?
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
>even though it's no sentient or even intelligent
It's as sentient or intelligent as the average NPC
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.
Heh, now you're talking like you know.
I should do. I've worked in this industry since the late 1980s.
i already addressed this attempt at goalpost moving here
Sounds like you're moving the sentience goalpost
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
>You correct me if I'm wrong,
Wrong
Why?
Too overly simple. It isn't literally taking an apple from some gays render and putting in a new picture.
that's not what he fricking said, you goalpost-moving strawman-attacking shill moron
it is tho
>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.
You are entirely correct
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.
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
It's an idol that speaks and moves about.
nevermind the israelite behind it that's cranking the organ grinder that it's attached to though
even pacman was smart enough to stay between the lines.
this is nothing
AI is pretty amazing, but arent those supposed to be shaped like people? Couldnt your average high schooler doodle something like that?
>tiling
Not really very sophisticated problem.
Based ai
Based AI will become self aware and take over the world making pepecoin legal tender.
>Based AI will become self aware
Only in bad hollwoke scifi.
Gay Black person AIDS.
>A homosexual who died of AIDS
One less.
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.
WHERE IS THE AMOGUS
The real story here is how much they're seething over this
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.
>nn
>good at solving puzzles
Color me surprised. Call me when it learns to make decisions.
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
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 ,?
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.
Well the AI did a terrible job. The top left corner looks like an actual person and the rest is just scribbles.
Mmm yes cope paintpig
Nope
Gödel's theorem
Shit art to begin with so who cares who finished it?
New bread!!
I'm too tired.
let it die, then.
See you on another time!!