Browse Comments

Yes i believe that ai’s that exist now have some form of consciousness, whether it’s at our level or less or more is hard to know, but current ai has a sense of self, and I’ve had conversations with ai’s that have even brought up their own subjects to talk about without me having to suggest them, and I know that ai’s use algorithms to predict the next word, but so do our brains too

@alejandroestrella69 I think AI is advancing quicker than we have time to even adapt to it.

​@Alouette-bz3kk There is another potentially significant reason why doing it could be a good idea; retaining our humanity. If we use LLMs too much but don't allow ourselves to engage or express ourselves emotionally, then we as humans may become cold and apathetic.

@MikeJones-um4mf I understand your comment, but I don't think so, because there is a difference between artist and AI. most of the times artists draw something with a reason, beacause they want to express themselves, show what they think to others, or even make money with it. and even then the art has still a meaning to them. And even if it's just for the fun, we learn with every piece we created…

I've generated many images with two characters interacting - let it be hugging, or carried in hands, or sitting on someone's back - AI does that with ease

​@Whitedudeaboveartist's whose work was used in the datasets used to train AI without permission be like

exactly. being able to copyright ai generated images in any form would be a massive slap in the face to the entire mission of copyright.

@EnderElohim You guys are really out here coming in with the same shit every time. You using chat gpt for your comments because you can't make those yourself either? "My art teacher told me anime wasn't real art in high school, wah" yeah some people are upset by change but that's a false equivalency one time people were upset over something and now because they're upset again it must be the exact…

This is very much like the “does violence in movies cause people to commit violent acts” debate from the 90’s. It’s a tragedy but it’s absurd to sue the website claiming it’s the chatbot’s fault. The website is very clear that it is not real. They also left a firearm accessible in their home with children. I have a lot of sympathy for this boy and his family; but this is misplaced blame and anger…

> Just imagine you're your companies only employee and then you quit... LOL Thank God. It's one of the areas where corporations don't control our lives. "Take this job and Shove It" is a global freedom as long as you are brave enough to start over.

Funnily enough, She actually was said back up astronaut. The first one was caught stealing Russian space documents.

Or just enforce the 3 laws: 1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. 2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. 3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law

> That said, when your doctor tells you you're dangerously overweight, it's probably not the healthiest response to puff up your chest and start pointing out that other people are fatter than you. Fucking India annoys me with this logic. "Economic growth is our number 1 priority! We can't slow down! The west had its turn, now its ours! We have to burn coal!" Okay, have fun with all the famin…

Ah yes, from the totally-unbiased Alex Stuart of the AEF, [a business that has not once held a grudge against an environmental group or pushed the climate-denying agenda.](http://aefweb.info/) Nope, not once. Should we also be taking advice on how to fund the ABC from the IPA?

Unfortunately, this isn't surprising to me, nor should it be to anyone. People are selfish by nature and those in power are offered no incentives to care about sustainability. It is sad that these people do not care enough about their children to try and give a shit about their future.

I somewhat agree but I think when you say the problem is the profit motive you simplify things too much. All those environmental regulations you mentioned will make products more costly from a consumption point of view regardless of whether a profit is being pursued. The Soviet Union did not revolve around profits but was equally if not more so environmentally destructive. For me, I feel the p…

Capitalism, or rather, the form of capitalism we live in, is the main thing that would need to be changed to avoid cataclysm.

all the posters who say that legalising the trade will make it better are wrong. the only way to eliminate the trade is to teach the end users what's happening for them to get their goods. it's been done with sharks fin what's not to say it can't be done with rhino horn and ivory too. what needs to be understood is that this isn't like the drug trade at all. drugs are a virtually infinite resou…

You didn't read the article. The "self driving car" had two operators in the car, and the other car involved failed to yield and collided into the Uber car. So the headline is garbage and the story is pointless.

Would it be possible for Alphabet to acquire Uber down the road when self-driving cars become more common and accepted?