I, ChatGPT
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
That the choice of a stroke here, or a line there, is on some level intended to be part of the whole, in a way that AI (currently) doesn't.
I'd argue that current day AI is perfectly capable of intentionally adding a stroke here or a line there to make the whole score higher with the goal function.
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
We used to marvel at the idea of robots coming in and doing the menial jobs to let humans have the time and room to be creative. Now we are running headlong toward letting the machines do the creative work leaving humans only the room for menial jobs.
On the other hand, AI will only be used for mass market commercial type of art, so once it takes over that sector entirely, human artists, being free of contractual obligations, will be able to make art any way they want, with no editor, executive or marketing specialist messing with their creative vision. Like what happened with knitters between 17th and 20th century. Yes, it's much harder to sell your hand knit sweater than 400 years ago, but aren't you happier making it?
-
@Gustav said in I, ChatGPT:
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
That the choice of a stroke here, or a line there, is on some level intended to be part of the whole, in a way that AI (currently) doesn't.
I'd argue that current day AI is perfectly capable of intentionally adding a stroke here or a line there to make the whole score higher with the goal function.
I suppose that gets into what classifies as intent. An artist might add a stroke here or a line there to “make the picture look better” based on experience and training, while the machine adds it because of a black box that will give it more points if it does.
I could see how these could be thought of as equivalent on some level even if I don’t agree.
-
@Gustav said in I, ChatGPT:
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
We used to marvel at the idea of robots coming in and doing the menial jobs to let humans have the time and room to be creative. Now we are running headlong toward letting the machines do the creative work leaving humans only the room for menial jobs.
On the other hand, AI will only be used for mass market commercial type of art, so once it takes over that sector entirely, human artists, being free of contractual obligations, will be able to make art any way they want, with no editor, executive or marketing specialist messing with their creative vision. Like what happened with knitters between 17th and 20th century. Yes, it's much harder to sell your hand knit sweater than 400 years ago, but aren't you happier making it?
On the other hand, AI is already being used to generate various kinds of artistic product, books, images, audio, and even experimentally with video. The big corps would love it if they never had to pay set painters, writers, or actors again. (This was in part what the actor’s strike was primarily about: protecting their industry from the big corps just recording them and using their likeness for free.)
It most certainly will not only be used for mass market anything, because it’s already today being used for more than that.
Aside from the number of apps that are growing which are just layers on top of ChatGPT directly, there’s absolutely no shortage of people doing things like getting their app icons and incidental artwork from AI rather than paying an artist or even paying for stock assets. And that’s not “mass market” but solopreneurs cutting their costs with something good enough to cut a human out entirely.
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
@Gustav said in I, ChatGPT:
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
That the choice of a stroke here, or a line there, is on some level intended to be part of the whole, in a way that AI (currently) doesn't.
I'd argue that current day AI is perfectly capable of intentionally adding a stroke here or a line there to make the whole score higher with the goal function.
I suppose that gets into what classifies as intent. An artist might add a stroke here or a line there to “make the picture look better” based on experience and training, while the machine adds it
...also based on experience and training, in the most literal sense. Do you need some introductory machine learning courses?
I could see how these could be thought of as equivalent on some level even if I don’t agree.
I also don't see them as equivalent, but you have a talent for picking the worst possible phrasing for the point you're trying to make.
-
@Gustav thought for the day: if someone has a “knack” for something, is it possible they’re doing it deliberately? Perhaps even to try to make a point on some level?
(The alternative is that it is deliberate but so chronically misapplied it’s also hilariously bad arguing. Either view works and both are probably right.)
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
@Gustav said in I, ChatGPT:
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
We used to marvel at the idea of robots coming in and doing the menial jobs to let humans have the time and room to be creative. Now we are running headlong toward letting the machines do the creative work leaving humans only the room for menial jobs.
On the other hand, AI will only be used for mass market commercial type of art, so once it takes over that sector entirely, human artists, being free of contractual obligations, will be able to make art any way they want, with no editor, executive or marketing specialist messing with their creative vision. Like what happened with knitters between 17th and 20th century. Yes, it's much harder to sell your hand knit sweater than 400 years ago, but aren't you happier making it?
On the other hand, AI is already being used to generate various kinds of artistic product, books, images, audio, and even experimentally with video. The big corps would love it if they never had to pay set painters, writers, or actors again. (This was in part what the actor’s strike was primarily about: protecting their industry from the big corps just recording them and using their likeness for free.)
It most certainly will not only be used for mass market anything, because it’s already today being used for more than that.
Aside from the number of apps that are growing which are just layers on top of ChatGPT directly, there’s absolutely no shortage of people doing things like getting their app icons and incidental artwork from AI rather than paying an artist or even paying for stock assets. And that’s not “mass market” but solopreneurs cutting their costs with something good enough to cut a human out entirely.
Commercial artwork that didn't have any soul in it even before computers took over, is what I meant. Whether mass market or purpose-built, it's still 0% art and 100% utility - whether that utility is entertainment, brand recognition or UI.
50 years for now, when putting colors together won't be able to make you a single dime no matter how good you are, artists will finally be able to go 0% utility, 100% art. Similar to how hand knitted clothes of today aren't meant (and often are physically impossible) to be worn.
-
That whole argument of “100% art” does rather rely on the artist being able to feed themselves, though, which is sort of the key problem.
-
@Arantor not at all.
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
That whole argument of “100% art” does rather rely on the artist being able to feed themselves, though, which is sort of the key problem.
The market for blacksmithing is a lot smaller than it used to be too.
-
@Arantor they'll be able to feed themselves the same way knitters do - by having a different job and only doing art as a hobby. Wasn't that, more or less, the end goal of those visions of robots doing all the menial work and leaving humans with more free time?
-
Yeah, expect we never got the "more free time" part. Instead we got bullshit jobs because you have to keep the hamster wheel running all the time, you see?
-
@Gustav said in I, ChatGPT:
@Arantor they'll be able to feed themselves the same way knitters do - by having a different job and only doing art as a hobby. Wasn't that, more or less, the end goal of those visions of robots doing all the menial work and leaving humans with more free time?
Until the AI comes for those jobs too, because that’s where it’s clearly going. Everything that exists in a form that can be manipulated by AI is either already being encroached on, or being experimented with.
And that doesn’t just put the obvious candidates out of work but the related ones - if actors can be digitally manifested you don’t need a wardrobe department, or a lighting engineer, or a camera operator. Or a director. And you won’t need a writer because that’s already covered too.
As much as we like to think we’re immune, we’re really not. The world has been working on doing exactly the same to us for a while, with the rise of low-code and no-code solutions, and AI writing code. Sure, right now, it’s a shitshow but it won’t always be that way. We’ve all marvelled at how far they came and how quickly. While I don’t see an AGI any time soon, I do see a culling of developers at significant numbers in the next 10 years because AI will be good enough to replace many developers.
At some point the only thing left will be the physical jobs. The menial ones that automation was supposed to free us from.
I hope it will be worth it.
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
, I do see a culling of developers at significant numbers in the next 10 years because AI will be good enough to replace many developers.
10 years? Sounds fine to me now; don't need a job past then as I'll be in a position to retire with a full pension.
-
@dkf said in I, ChatGPT:
full pension
Ah, but that depends on working people putting contributions in the various coffers, be it State or personal, to pay you from. Which is not looking altogether rosy.
-
@dkf said in I, ChatGPT:
The market for blacksmithing is a lot smaller than it used to be too.
And it's a cutthroat market for pirates.
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in I, ChatGPT:
that depends on working people putting contributions in the various coffers
And the investments of the fund.
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
with the rise of low-code and no-code solutions, and AI writing code.
Color me scared.
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
As much as we like to think we’re immune, we’re really not. The world has been working on doing exactly the same to us for a while, with the rise of low-code and no-code solutions, and AI writing code. Sure, right now, it’s a shitshow but it won’t always be that way.
Sure, it'll be a shitshow. None of us here think that the people writing the code aren't a shitshow or we wouldn't be here. It might be an AI dominated shitshow. Or our jobs become more business analyst than coder as we guide the AI to output something usable.
As a wise man once said, "It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future."
-
-
@Zerosquare I think it's yellow.
-
@Zerosquare said in I, ChatGPT:
@topspin said in I, ChatGPT:
Color me scared.
E_COLOR_NOT_FOUND
Octarine, the most elusive of colours.
-
we're closer to a natural language user interface than having a web ui that isn't a pain to center a div
-
@sockpuppet7 said in I, ChatGPT:
we're closer to a natural language user interface than having a web ui that isn't a pain to center a div
I’m beginning to regrat mentioning that.
-
Someone needs to rein him in. He’s created a questionable google competitor, not Mike.
Shoutout to my Heinlein homies.
-
@DogsB said in I, ChatGPT:
@sockpuppet7 said in I, ChatGPT:
we're closer to a natural language user interface than having a web ui that isn't a pain to center a div
I’m beginning to regrat mentioning that.
div centering is the classic example of css being annoying on things that used to be trivial before
-
@DogsB said in I, ChatGPT:
Someone needs to rein him in. He’s created a questionable google competitor, not Mike.
Shoutout to my Heinlein homies.
that's my religion and he's one of our prophets
-
@DogsB said in I, ChatGPT:
Someone needs to rein him in.
-
@sockpuppet7 said in I, ChatGPT:
div centering is the classic example of css being annoying on things that used to be trivial before
*approbative @Zenith noises*
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in I, ChatGPT:
@DogsB said in I, ChatGPT:
Someone needs to rein him in.
I need to get into warhammer. So many great memes.
-
-
Interesting little art project (can't really call it an article):
Decentish description of what's going on for non-technical people plus some philosophical musings.
-
-
@TimeBandit That's the end-game right? AGI + advanced robotics => skynet => remove humans. Problem solved.
-
@TimeBandit said in I, ChatGPT:
There is an quote I read once that seems apt:
Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.” --Rick Cook
-
-
@boomzilla said in I, ChatGPT:
Interesting little art project (can't really call it an article):
Decentish description of what's going on for non-technical people plus some philosophical musings.
Loved it but SCNR
"Things that remind you of exactly nobody here" thread:
Edith: it should be "pandemonium of parrots" here of course but TIL.
-
-
@DogsB said in I, ChatGPT:
Someone needs to rein him in.
https://openai.com/blog/openai-announces-leadership-transition
-
@Zecc said in I, ChatGPT:
@DogsB said in I, ChatGPT:
Someone needs to rein him in.
https://openai.com/blog/openai-announces-leadership-transition
From Ars(e) commentariat:
In a plot twist, Sam discovers that his job as CEO has been outsourced to GPT5 beta. Sic transit gloria mundi…
Filed under: Profound Latin
-
"Godzilla, the notorious monstrous lizard, locked in an earth-shaking duel with @boomzilla, a gigantic speaker-on-legs that constantly wobbles to the bass. A battle dubbed the "Bass Drop Heard Around the World."
-
@sockpuppet7 said in I, ChatGPT:
a gigantic speaker-on-legs that constantly wobbles to the bass
That seems too plausible.
-
-
-
@Gustav well, about that…
-
@Arantor said in I, ChatGPT:
@Gustav well, about that…
Guess the board just found out that when Microsoft says jump, they’re contractually obligated to say “how high?”
-
So apparently intellisense is now "AI"?
This has to stop at some point, right?
-
@Tsaukpaetra Never underestimate the power of buzzword marketing.
I hate chatbots so much. Guessing what keywords trigger what behaviors is a pain in the ass whether it's speech or text. Why can't we just go back to predefined menus?
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in I, ChatGPT:
So apparently intellisense is now "AI"?
GPT is just fancy autocomplete, so really, what’s the difference
-
@kazitor said in I, ChatGPT:
@Tsaukpaetra said in I, ChatGPT:
So apparently intellisense is now "AI"?
GPT is just fancy autocomplete, so really, what’s the difference
Might be some hope for it.