• 1 Post
  • 123 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle

  • As always, the problem is our economic system that has funneled every gain and advance to the benefit of the few. The speed of this change will make it impossible to ignore the need for a new system. If it wasn’t for AI, we would just boil the frog like always. But let’s remember the real issue.

    If a free food generating machine is seen as evil for taking jobs, the free food machine wouldn’t be the issue. Stop protesting AI, start protesting affluent society. We would still be suffering under them even if we had destroyed the loom.



  • Perhaps instead we could just restructure our epistemically confabulated reality in a way that doesn’t inevitably lead to unnecessary conflict due to diverging models that haven’t grown the necessary priors to peacefully allow comprehension and the ability exist simultaneously.

    breath

    We are finally coming to comprehend how our brains work, and how intelligent systems generally work at any scale, in any ecosystem. Subconsciously enacted social systems included.

    We’re seeing developments that make me extremely optimistic, even if everything else is currently on fire. We just need a few more years without self focused turds blowing up the world.


  • Peanut@sopuli.xyztoTechnology@lemmy.worldGenerative A.I - We Aren’t Ready.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    AI or no AI, the solution needs to be social restructuring. People underestimate the amount society can actively change, because the current system is a self sustaining set of bubbles that have naturally grown resilient to perturbations.

    The few people who actually care to solve the world’s problems are figuring out how our current systems inevitably fail, and how to avoid these outcomes.

    However, the best bet for restructuring would be a distributed intelligent agent system. I could get into recent papers on confirmation bias, and the confabulatory nature of thought, on the personal level, group level, and society level.

    Turns out we are too good at going with the flow, even when the structure we are standing on is built over highly entrenched vestigial confabulations that no longer help.

    Words, concepts, and meanings change heavily depending on the model interpreting them. The more divergent, the more difficulty in bridging this communication gap.

    a distributed intelligent system could not only enable a complete social restructuring with autonomy and altruism both guaranteed, but with an overarching connection between the different models at every scale, capable of properly interpreting the different views, and conveying them more accurately than we could have ever managed with model projection and the empathy barrier.



  • The main issue though is the economic system, not the technology.

    My hope is that it shakes things up fast enough that they can’t boil the frog, and something actually changes.

    Having capable AI is a more blatantly valid excuse to demand a change in economic balance and redistribution. The only alternative would be destroy all technology and return to monkey. Id rather we just fix the system so that technological advancements don’t seem negative because the wealthy have already hoarded all new gains of every new technology for this past handful of decades.

    Such power is discretely weaponized through propaganda, influencing, and economic reorganizing to ensure the equilibrium stays until the world is burned to ash, in sacrifice to the lifestyle of the confidently selfish.

    I mean, we could have just rejected the loom. I don’t think we’d actually be better off, but I believe some of the technological gain should have been less hoardable by existing elite. Almost like they used wealth to prevent any gains from slipping away to the poor. Fixing the issue before it was this bad was the proper answer. Now people don’t even want to consider that option, or say it’s too difficult so we should just destroy the loom.

    There is a markov blanket around the perpetuating lifestyle of modern aristocrats, obviously capable of surviving every perturbation. every gain as a society has made that reality more true entirely due to the direction of where new power is distributed. People are afraid of AI turning into a paperclip maximizer, but that’s already what happened to our abstracted social reality. Maximums being maximized and minimums being minimized in the complex chaotic system of billions of people leads to inevitable increase of accumulation of power and wealth wherever it has already been gathered. Unless we can dissolve the political and social barrier maintaining this trend, it we will be stuck with our suffering regardless of whether we develop new technology or don’t.

    Although doesn’t really matter where you are or what system you’re in right now. Odds are there is a set of rich asshole’s working as hard as possible to see you are kept from any piece of the pie that would destabilize the status quo.

    I’m hoping AI is drastic enough that the actual problem isn’t ignored.




  • I definitely agree that copyright is a good half century in need of an update. Disney company and other contemporaries should never have been allowed the dominance and extension of copywrite that allows what feels like ownership of most global artistic output. They don’t need AI, they have the money and interns to create whatever boardroom adjusted art they need to continue their dominance.

    Honestly I think the faster AI happens, the more likely it is that we find a way out of the social and economical hierarchical structure that feels one step from anarcho-capitalistic aristocracy.

    I just hope we can find the change without riots.


  • Peanut@sopuli.xyztoTechnology@lemmy.worldGenerative AI Has a Visual Plagiarism Problem
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    And you violate copyright when you think about copywritten things alone at night.

    I violate copyright when i draw Mario and don’t sell it to anybody.

    Or these are dumb stretches of what copyright is and how it should be applied.

    the reasoning in this article is dumb and all over the place.

    Seems like gary marcus being gary marcus.

    Already seen openAI calling out some of the bullshit specifically noted in this. That doesn’t matter though, damage is done and people WANT to believe ai is terrible in every way.

    Everyone is just deadfast determined to climb onto the gary marcus unreasonable AI hate train no matter what.


  • God I want some large projects by independent teams. It’s impossible to do anything without a sponsor, but this might be what we need for smaller groups to create wonderful complex works of art, instead of cookiecutter boardroom content machines that currently flood almost all available commercial artistic spaces.

    Can’t wait to see how the tech develops. It’s be curious to do VR experience recreations of my dreams through AI dictation.

    Modelling, rigging, animation and the like are all coming. Imagine walking around a world being crafted and changed as you describe each element to be exactly what you are looking for.

    I think it would capture more artist intent than the unnecessary interface of archaic tools that create an artificial interface and challenge between you and your vision.

    Especially if you’ve damaged your digits, or otherwise lack digital dexterity.

    But change scares people. Especially ones who have put in effort to conform to the current economic system corporate art creators.




  • The real solution is to solve the power imbalance. What percentage of creative media is controlled by the already obscenely wealthy? We don’t want “non infringing proprietary models” to be the only legal models, because then the only ones with access to such powerful tools are the ones that can afford the Adobe art tax.

    We need to hold our governments accountable to hold the oligarches accountable for imbalancing the power struggles to an unethical degree. The common people have received no benefit from technological improvement based productivity gain in the past 50 years and this will only get worse until it is fixed in drastic fashion

    The common people need a GUARANTEE to benefit from productivity increases. Unions are also good, but nothing is being done about unethical anti-union campaigning from those with already imbalanced amounts of power and influence.

    Yadda yadda. Going after open source models ain’t gonna help. I’m fine pushing for special forgiveness for open models, but don’t just put the ball into the hands of the people who can afford proprietary datasets.


  • People’s perspective is killing their sense of awe.

    While our economic system is grand in ensuring our experience of life doesn’t improve, technology has gotten kind of crazy and awesome.

    They could release an agi next year, and unless it affected people’s work life balance, people would just immediately get used to it and think it’s boring.

    Will generative AI still kill our sense of awe when video game characters can naturally and accurately respond how you would expect?

    I would never get bored of it. The majority of people would find it a boring novelty after a couple days because we are good at getting used to things and people don’t want to recognize the fact. We will have full fantastical worlds to explore and people will still find reason to be salty because it’s made with the help of evil computers.

    I’m personally eager for a life where my recreational experiences aren’t defined by companies like Disney. Smaller artists with these powerful tools will be able to create wonderful unique experiences without the ball and chain of media oligarches.

    We have more control than we think of our sense of awe.

    Maybe it’s time for a new perspective on art and industry.


  • Hey shill here. I also shill for other artistic tools like cameras and CGI. Got a lot of hate back when CGI and digital painting were still controversial. Don’t know if such “art” will ever truly be accepted by the art police, i guess AI art tools will join them.

    Personally I think independent artists can accomplish much more with tools like these than they could just pretending to be a Disney art director with all the pretend Disney interns not actually helping their vision come to life.

    I like when art isn’t monopolized by the ones with all the money. I also like when we allow open models that aren’t proprietary adobe subscriptions.

    Also this thread is hilarious. OpenAI are literally asking to be regulated by more democratic external bodies. They’ve been making every effort one could expect on this front, but I guess that doesn’t matter?

    It’s like when Altman went to the senate and said “regulate larger and more capable models like we will have, but don’t stifle and limit open source and smaller startups”

    And everyone started bashing openAI for encouraging regulation of open source.

    If I’m a brain dead tech bro, at least I have decades of familiarity with art, copywrite woes, and AI/ML. Back in school I was just called a nerd, but I guess that framing doesn’t really work these days so i need to be compared to frat bro adventure capitalists every time I have an opinion that’s not negative to new technologies.