Peanut @ Peanutbjelly @sopuli.xyz

Posts

1

Comments

172

Joined

2 yr. ago

People like to push the negative human qualities onto theoretical future A.I.

There's no reason to assume that it will be unreasonably selfish, egotistical, impatient, or anything else you expect from most humans.

Rather, if it is more intelligent than humans from most perspectives, it will likely be able to understand more levels of nuance in interactions where humans fall back on monkeybrain heuristics that are damaging at every level.

There's also the paradox that keeps the most ethically qualified people away from positions of power, as they have no desire to dominate and demand or control others.

I absolutely agree with you.

couple decent thoughts. That the real issue is more economic than technological is the reality that's good to focus on.

Others just really display how little they know about both the issue and the technology.

"That AI is conceived and enabled by brilliant, ambitious, but immature men" was a bit of a funny line, because I'm wondering how you could defend that statement among minds like Melanie Mitchell. I mean, many of my favorites in the field are anything but "immature" In any way.

Some complain about the Canadian standards of disregarding copyright for educational purposes. I've always thought that was something that shows great humanity in the face of a system fueled by greed.

Remember when copyright only lasted a couple decades, and virtually everything else existed in public domain? We used to have these weird ideas like thinking about the betterment of the general public or educational systems were important for some reason.

All of the complaints are extremely unspecific. Do they care about open source vs corporate? Do they even understand the basic concept of how these things work?

Does our economic system need to be fixed? Yes. Are we going to get there by crying about the terror of the "soullessness" of machines and education? I doubt it.

In the form of Amazon exclusive currency*

I loved the CV1 oculus. The moment Facebook integration started happening I noped the fuck out of there. Also can't stand overly proprietary environments. Acquiescence to researchers like yann lecun would be the only reason I don't absolutely detest meta at this point.

I'm no fan of meta, but a reminder that they are one of the best right now for keeping their AI developments more open and available. This is thanks to yann lecun and other researchers pressuring meta to keep their info on the subject more open.

Are we looking to punish them for making their work accessible?

Not to mention how important something like joint embedded predictive architecture could be for the future of alignment and real world training/learning. Maybe go after other foundation model developers to be more open, if we're complaining about the inevitably public nature of some information within the mountainous datasets being used.

Although I'm still of the mindset that the model intent matters more than the use of openly available data in training. I.E. I've been shouting about models being used specifically to predict and manipulate user interactions/habits for the better part of a decade. For your "customized advertisements" and the like.

The general public and media interaction on the topic this past year has been insufferably out of touch.

... Basically the day it was created.

So you also equate French nobility with nazi victims?

Nobody is being called out for their race or sexual preferences or body they were given at birth. The people being targeted here are defined only as the ones who have plundered the world to fill their pockets regardless of the cost. It is the very act of power hungry and despotic rule that leads to this call. Remember that every family member and friend we lose to the meat grinder could have lived happily if not for the ones who deem us unworthy of human treatment. Every home burnt to the ground as the fires worsen, because they refuse to let environmental care affect their overflowing coffers.

How many more people should die and suffer for their wont?

This is not a comparable situation, you silly person.

It's kinda gross. Also, not saying that shouldn't be addressed, since it should, but I'm more concerned with the state of mobile app markets. Pick an game at random and i can probably show you a plethora of ways it is specifically designed to take advantage of subconscious habits and weaknesses. Especially of the vulnerable.

I've seen children gathering and spending excessive money in the most unhealthy habitual ways conceivable, and it's bad enough for vulnerable adults who weren't trained into the mindset since youth.

People don't even understand the problem, and will defend the practice as their freedom. Who, while compelled by addiction, won't be defensive when their problem is brought to light? But it's bad enough that the popular opinion seems to be in defence of the practices.

It's just sitting perfectly within the gray area outside of people's concerns or cares. the bastards with no qualms taking advantage of the vulnerable or incapable are running away with hundreds of billions of dollars. Money out of the pockets of those who couldn't mentally compete with professionally developed and financed methods of manipulation.

Deceptive designs are bad enough. Blatant scams or unethically disturbing advertisements should have been bad enough. Blatantly manipulating should be well over the mountain of shit that needs addressing on this front.

Won't even get into the topic of roblox..

So a platform that more heavily favours and incentivizes the information preferred and supported by those with expendable money.

Can we eat the rich yet?

Can we talk more about deceptive patterns? I had my computer go down recently, and I was reminded just how bad mobile is.

Pick a game at random and I'll show you a dozen direct and intentional manipulations to get you into the habit and environment they want you to be in for optimal resource extraction. I miss when games were an artform rather than a human habit adjusting set of professionally designed manipulations that can annoy you into the right mindset to give money. Not to mention the advertisements which range from absolute fabrication to actual scam.

I swear the actual gain from prime is virtually indecipherable. The less you understand it, the less you can actually complain about what you are paying for.

It also does not boost my confidence when they use deceptive patterns to sneak you back into prime, or keep you from leaving.

The average person doesn't give a hoot though, and will get actively upset at you for pointing out deceptive patterns when it's a brand they use, so I we can probably expect things to get worse whenever physically possible.

So we kill open source models, and proprietary data models like adobe are fine, so they can be the only resource and continue rent seeking while independent artists can eat dirt.

Whether or not the model learned from my art is probably not going to affect me in any way shape or form, unless I'm worried about being used as a prompt so people could use me as a compass while directing their new image aesthetic. Disney/warner could already hire someone to do that 100% legally, so it's just the other peasants im worried about. I don't think the peasants are the problem when it comes to the wellbeing and support of artists

I mean, chess is already obsolete, but it's also more popular than ever.

To me there is extreme value in being able to choose your endeavor vs being forced into something agonizing just to survive.

When everything is obsolete, people can create entire worlds and experiences using AI for themselves and for others who may care to experience it.

The threat of needing to find something to do is one of the most frustratingly privileged concepts.

I don't need anything to do. I just want to be alive without also being exhausted, in pain, and chastised by customers despite working my hardest.

I'd rather the struggle of finding an activity over worrying about whichever coworker is crying in the walk-in because just surviving requires more from them than they are capable of.

Being obsoleted is fine by me, as long as we have the power redistribution necessary to keep people alive and happy.

When they switched the window exiting x button on the "upgrade to windows ten!" Notification to accept the installation rather than just exit the notification.

I'd been exiting that window every day to set up our work computers, as our point of sales solution didn't support the newer version of windows.

My horror when our shop doors open and the screen turns to "updating to windows 10"

We basically lost a day of sales since we had to do thing sans POS.

When I told the owner that I definitely didn't accept the installation, he called Microsoft which told him I must have accepted the installation.

Yes there are different types of art. Yes some are impressive for technical skill in a specific medium. Traditional Hyper-Realism or corporate artists are good examples. Sandcastle art is cool too.

I don't think these things will lose their unique value, but they are similarly not arguments against photography, film,digital art, etc for the things that give them their unique value. I think that also applies to AI mediums.

Nuance in everything.

The AI in that song is just used as a tool to emulate the sound of drake's voice. The rest is standard artist composition.

While I don't particularly care for the song, comparing it to doping is not reasonable.

Same with all AI art tools. Actual artists can make reasonable use of these tools to more efficiently convey what they had wanted to convey.

This is just like when cameras were invented. Or people started using digital mediums. Or when people started making 3D art.

Even simple prompt only stuff like midjourney is improving to allow artists more control over the image they are trying to create.

If we end up with a holo-deck style experience where artists can craft entire worlds and details through gesture and dictation as a form of expression, is that still not art?

The acceptance of people being safe to love who they want to love, or be comfortable in their own body. Isn't that what Nazis were brainwashing for? No?

How about teaching from a scripture that encourages blind faith, the threat of eternal damnation, and hatred or abuse towards people for being gay?

We going to do an article every time someone uses a loom to make clothing?

The issue is that art currently relies on the whims of people who control the money.

We need a new socioeconomic system with a more fair wealth distribution, so common people can afford choose to support artists that they want to support.

i hate giving anecdotal evidence, but i wasn't expecting it to be such a black and white change for me personally.

i can draw a clear line between the previous twenty years of my life, and a few years ago.

it's just weirdly amazing to able to have a small thing go wrong and just be like "ah dangit." rather than having a depressive spiral and mourning my own existence for the rest of the day.

not that i don't sometimes have pessimistic thoughts or bad days, it's just not overwhelmingly defining of my every moment.

at the very least, i'm eager to see a lot more research being done. if it is legitimate, and others can have the same change in life experience that i've had, then it's a damn tragedy it hasn't been studied more thoroughly ages ago.

artist here. nobody is thinking about AI as a tool being used.. by artists.

the pareidolia aspect of diffusion specifically does a great job of mimicking the way artists conceptualize an image. it's not 1 to 1, but to say the models are stealing from the data they were trained on is definitely as silly as claiming an artist was stealing every time they admired or incorporated aspects of other people's art into their own.

i'm also all for opensource and publicly available models. if independent artists lose that tool, they will be competing with large corps who can buy all the data they need, and hold exclusive proprietary models while independent artists get nothing.

ultimately this tech is leading to a holo-deck style of creation, where you can define you vision through direction and language rather than through hands that you've already destroyed practicing linework for decades. or through hunting down the right place for a photograph. or having a beach not wash your sandcastle away with the tide.

there are many aspects to art and creation. A.I. is one more avenue, and it's a good one. as long as we don't make it impossible to use without subscribing to the landlords of art tools.