Peanut

Big. Fan of ai stuff. Not a fan of this. This definitely won’t have issues with minority populations and neurodivergents falling outside of distribution and causing false positives that enable more harassment of people who already get unfairly harassed.

Let this die with the mind reading tactics they spawned from.

I see intelligence as filling areas of concept space within an econiche in a way that proves functional for actions within that space. I think we are discovering more that “nature” has little commitment, and is just optimizing preparedness for expected levels of entropy within the functional eco-niche.

Most people haven’t even started paying attention to distributed systems building shared enactive models, but they are already capable of things that should be considered groundbreaking considering the time and finances of development.

That being said, localized narrow generative models are just building large individual models of predictive process that doesn’t by default actively update information.

People who attack AI for just being prediction machines really need to look into predictive processing, or learn how much we organics just guess and confabulate ontop of vestigial social priors.

But no, corpos are using it so computer bad human good, even though the main issue here is the humans that have unlimited power and are encouraged into bad actions due to flawed social posturing systems and the confabulating of wealth with competency.

While I agree about the conflict of interest, I would largely say the same thing despite no such conflict of interest. However I see intelligence as a modular and many dimensional concept. If it scales as anticipated, it will still need to be organized into different forms of informational or computational flow for anything resembling an actively intelligent system.

On that note, the recent developments with active inference like RXinfer are astonishing given the current level of attention being paid. Seeing how llms are being treated, I’m almost glad it’s not being absorbed into the hype and hate cycle.

I’m talking about the general strides in cognitive computing and predictive processing.

https://youtu.be/A1Ghrd7NBtk?si=iaPVuRjtnVEA2mqw

Machine learning is still impressive, we just can better frame the limitations now.

For the note on scale and ecosystems, review recent work by karl friston or Michael Levin.

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.

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.

deleted by creator

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.

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.

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.

Hey! Artist here. I love drawing. My hands go numb within minutes and they shake more every year. I appreciate having a tool and medium that allows great artistic control despite these facts.

Now, if you’re really butthurt about the training data you can use adobe’s proprietary model. I for one think it’s good that peasants have an open available tool that isn’t owned by adobe, even if it was trained less proprietarily.

This anger about it reminds me of deviant art artists getting mad at each other for “copying my style”

And the fact that copywrite used to be about the general good, and promotion of creative works.

This world needs new artistic priorities. Pen and paper aren’t losing their place, but new tech will lead to independent artists creating entire movies, games, and holodeck style experiences without looming overhead of whatever art oligarch holds the funding.

hard to remember which videos specifically, because it was a comparison to things that were known when the video released. he’s been around a good while. listening to marcus often leaves me confused and baffled. not really in the mood to marathon marcus videos for examples, so feel free to disregard my opinions. but i’m definitely not alone in finding humour in the fact

marcus is a well known figure for being heavily critical of AI while also being comedically uninformed. much like the yud

i would like to have greater consideration for their opinions, but i find it difficult due to the often unfounded nature of their speculation. for marcus personally, i’ve seen him make arguments woefully out of touch with current information. this is why i describe him as being comedically uninformed.

wish the best for the guy, although i disagree with them both to the degree i find their reasoning childish and dangerous. the yud moreso.

and to the person assuming “yud” being racist for no reason, please get some help. he is an individual. i’m sure his harry potter fanfics are quality, and i mean no ill to the gentleman other than disagreeing strongly with his opinions on AI.

Gary marcus is the last person I would consider for a statement on the topic.

No offense intended, but Gary marcus is a hack and a joke. He is a very small step above the yud, and neither will contribute to the safety or development of this technology in any way.

I mean it’s not actual “full self drive” to begin with. It’s a lame impersonation of more advanced self driving vehicles that aren’t even being sold yet. That doesn’t matter to the elon fans though.

The lie that actually gets people killed, while also tainting the overall perception of autonomous vehicles. Thanks elon.

Yes, please keep fighting to ensure we are locked to adobe’s rent seeking model with no open alternatives.

The best thing for the art world is to make sure independent and poorer artists have no available competitive tools as we head into an inevitably advanced future. Where would we be without our intellectual landlords in such a future. The ones who can afford proprietary datasets are the only ones who deserve to prosper.

Right?

Yeah actually I don’t like that. Also as an artist with degrading digital dexterity, such a powerful medium that doesn’t rely on hours of causing my hands more damage is really cool.

Can’t wait to get holodeck style creative experiences. I will enjoy creating such things as well, if it’s not exclusively available through corporately aligned rent systems.

You’re conflating polarized opinions of very different people and groups.

That being said your antagonism towards investors and wealthy companies is very sound as a foundation.

Hinton only gave his excessive worry after he left his job. There is no reason to suspect his motives.

Lecun is the opposite side and believes the danger is in companies hoarding the technology. He is why the open community has gained so much traction.

OpenAI are simultaneously being criticized for putting AI out for public use, as well a for not being open enough about the architecture, or allowing the public to actually have control of the state of AI developments. That being said they are leaning towards more authoritarian control from united governments and groups.

I’m mostly geared towards yann lecun and being more open despite the risks, because there is more risk and harm from hindering development of or privatizing the growth of AI technology.

The reality is that every single direction they try is heavily criticized because the general public has jumped onto a weird AI hate train.

See artists still complaining about adobe AI regardless of the training data, and hating on the open model community despite giving power to the people who don’t want to join the adobe rent system.

Not to mention the reason we can all fuck around with llama models despite the fact. Props to yann and other meta AI researchers. Also eager to see future jepa stuff.

If only openAI was so open.