Originally posted by lowflyer
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
A 2024 Discussion Whether To Convert The Linux Kernel From C To Modern C++
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by ssokolow View PostThe problem is that the same argument could be levied against digital art because the people who make it don't understand how to mix paints or handle a chisel or what have you and probably was levied against them initially.
AI has no means of critical thinking, self-reflection or even understanding anything (human language, society).
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by ssokolow View PostThe problem is that you're not going to stop humans being humans. We're hard-wired to try to economize nutrients to our brain. That's one reason we have so many wetware exploits and why we stereotype and so on.
Originally posted by Albert EinsteinEverything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Anux View PostThat's not an argument and also totally different from generating random/AI images and then selecting 1 out of 1000 till you find something beautiful. This leads to not involving any art making process, because art starts in your head and everything else is just the tools and restrictions you use to bring the art to paper.
AI has no means of critical thinking, self-reflection or even understanding anything (human language, society).
Comment
-
Originally posted by Anux View PostEasy, just talk to them about their life.
As a means of distinguishing an LLM pretending to be human from a human, your suggestion has merit, mainly because most LLM's context windows are too small.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Old Grouch View PostYour understanding of the concept of a 'philosophical zombie' differs from mine.
Otherwise you're just creating beautiful things at best, like colorful flowers.
As a means of distinguishing an LLM pretending to be human from a human, your suggestion has merit, mainly because most LLM's context windows are too small.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Anux View PostThat's not an argument and also totally different from generating random/AI images and then selecting 1 out of 1000 till you find something beautiful. This leads to not involving any art making process, because art starts in your head and everything else is just the tools and restrictions you use to bring the art to paper.
AI has no means of critical thinking, self-reflection or even understanding anything (human language, society).
For example, some of the things about Stable Diffusion that aren't just "push button until your receive art" include:- Refining prompts (You'd be surprised how many preconceptions these models have and how many hidden connections between different keywords... and that's before you get into things like using reverse prompting tools to actually find keywords for what you want, using model inspection tools to discover if the model training internalized a keyword or phrase by tokenizing it in an unhelpful way, etc. At the high ends, it starts to feel more like debugging crashes in a C program.)
- Gradient prompts (Similar to how you can animate properties in Blender 3D, you can tell Stable Diffusion to "animate" the weights of keywords in the prompt over the number of refinement iterations you specified, because Stable Diffusion rendering is sort of like progressive JPEG rendering or how painters will block in a canvas, then paint large blobs, then iteratively introduce finer and finer detail, so you can do stuff like telling it to start out rendering person A, and then switch to aiming for person B before the identifying details go in.)
- Regional prompting (If you want something to be true in one part of an image but not another, such as having two different characters in the same scene, you need to write multiple prompts and specify what portions of the image each one applies to. Not all Stable Diffusion frontends support this.)
- ControlNet (eg. OpenPose, which is the Stable Diffusion equivalent to putting IK bones inside a model in Blender 3D... though it's not always reliable and the tooling for it is still kind of byzantine.)
- Inpainting (Once you've got an image that's almost right, you can mark regions and re-render them, using the existing content as a biasing weight. Expertise deciding how to tweak the prompt applies. Inpainting may involve using the same model or a custom inpainting model more specialized to the task.)
- etc. etc. etc.
Overall, I'd say that art-generating A.I. is barely out of the IMSAI Altair Build It Yourself Kit phrase right now, but it's very much not "push button, receive acclaim" either way. It just looks that way because of the combination of hype and "Unlike traditional art tools, where having vision is easy and making it look good is the hard part", A.I. leans more toward "It'll try to make even the dumbest prompts look good, but they all quickly reveal themselves to be formulaic and boring unless you have a vision and the skill to successfully guide the A.I. into implementing it."
(i.e. The skill isn't in making a polished-looking output, it's in making an output that matches your vision instead of just being a bland re-hashing of whatever traits occurred most often in the training set... you can see why it's so popular for I-dont-want-to-pay-for-my-stock-images top-of-article filler.)
In a sense, what we're seeing is just a really fancy version of how, in the 90s, people would upload low-effort output from Photoshop plugins for generating things like marble/cloud/etc. textures.Last edited by ssokolow; 05 April 2024, 07:15 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by lowflyer View PostIn software there is a distinct benefit of lazyness: It can be a driving force behind optimization. Well humans will always remain humans and errors will be made. I will always accept that. However we can (and should) call them out for ignorance - or "willful blindness".
Comment
-
Originally posted by ssokolow View PostCertainly, but we mustn't fall into the trap of thinking we can fix individual people. That never works. We need systemic protections. That's why businesses get regulated. That's why colleges have a system for appealing bad marks. etc.
Blindly calling for "systemic protections" is the trap. It is pointing at "the others". It is the enshrinement of the saying "If only all would do like this / be like this ...". Too much regulations makes businesses go bankrupt. Too many ways of appealing makes college degrees useless. Who protects the regulated from the regulators? It's a big mistake to think that the rule-making-people are not "broken" themselves. Introducing rules is the communist/socialist/marxist approach. There are enough examples on this planet that show how this never works.
There needs to be a balance. While a ground layer of moral rules is necessary - anything much beyond that is from the devil.
Comment
Comment