Raw LLM Responses

@GlaciusTS „Defeatist? I see the AI winning as a victory.” How is it a victory? All it will bring will be poverty, increased social inequality, reduced social mobility, an extinction of creativity, an increase in the commodification of all media, and an homogenization of art. „Thing is, you cannot provide any proof that these programs do not learn like humans do. HUMANS scan patterns with their eyes” Dude, actual machine learning experts proved these programs do not learn like humans. Let me quote a critic of current machine learning paradigms: „It never fully masters abstract relationship. It doesn’t know for example, in a fully general way that for all countries A and all B, if country A won more games than country B, country is a better candidate for “country that won the most games” (The fact that standard neural networks have trouble with this was the central claim of my 2001 book The Algebraic Mind; recent careful studies with arithmetic shows that such universal knowledge remains a stick pointing for current neural networks” Gary Marcus, about ChatGPT „The immense database of things that GPT draws on consists entirely of language uttered by humans, in the real world with utterances that (generally) grounded in the real world. That means, for examples, that the entities (churros, surgical tools) and properties (“allow[s] for greater precision and control during surgery, risking the risk of complications and improving the overall outcomes patients”) generally refer to real entities and properties in the world. GPT doesn’t talk randomly, because it’s pastiching things actual people said. (Or, more often, synonyms and paraphrases of those things.) When GPT gets things right, it is often combining bits that don’t belong together, but not quite in random ways, but rather in ways where there is some overlap in some aspect or another. Example: Churros are in a cluster of small things that the system (roughly speaking) groups together, presumably including eg baseballs, grasshoppers, forceps, and so forth. GPT doesn’t actually know which of the elements appropriately combine with which other properties. Some small things really do “allow[s] for greater precision and control during surgery, risking the risk of complications and improving the overall outcomes patients” But GPT idea has no idea which. In some sense, GPT is like a glorified version of cut and paste, where everything that is cut goes through a paraphrasing/synonymy process before it is paste but together—and a lot of important stuff is sometimes lost along the way.” Same guy, same article. And this is not even half of the problems. These programs do dot develop any understanding of anything, and humans are much more then just pattern recognition programs. We know this, thanks to the fact that most animals have horrible pattern recognition, yet do much better when dealing with novel solutions then any currently existing AI does. „As for you’re number one, maybe not based on your very narrow and subjective description of the word “create”. I’ve been creating original art with the AI fairly consistently” No. you created nothing. Not anymore then you would if you had just hired another person to draw the art for you. You did nothing, outside of ordering the programs around. „Every piece of art is derivative from prior exposure” Please, that is just a made up excuse, created by rich, elitist, fine artists, to justify stealing from poorer artists. „I am aware there are paralyzed artists who draw from their mouth, and I know they’ll never be capable of a Da Vinci or a Van Gough” What a disgusting, ableist claim. „Lucky for me, I found a tool that translates better than my hand.” No. You did not. This is not a tool. It is an artificial artist, who you order around. Now, it is not sapient, or even sentient. But that does not change the fact that it exist to replace artists. It also cannot translate what you have in your mind, thanks to its lack of any way of actually understanding you. It can only give you a derivative image. „. A lot of the AI artists” There is no such thing. They are not artists. They are AI customers. „And yeah, I’m aware of the lawsuits. What was it they called the AI? “Collage Art”? They better get a better understanding of how these things work and be prepared to argue against the hundreds of other uses for this technology. ” 1. Well, it is closer to truth then your nonsensical claims. 2. What other uses? The only uses of this technology are at generating images, which means it has only two uses, replacing artists, or making fake news/fake images. „You think your government wants to hinder the technology other countries are racing to get to first? ” What other countries? China, who banned Ai made images that lack watermarks? England, where the government is currently debating whether this things should be allowed or not? The USA, where the center of the opposition and the class action lawsuit take place? The other members of the EU, who have already started to work on regulations on AI? Russia, which is a joke of a country, with barely any useful inventions, and is pretty damn poor? Most random third world countries? Yeah, that is not all, but you really dont understand what other countries believe and want. Also, I am Romanian. I am not from the USA. „But please, go on some more about how different AI is from people, so I can tell you that you are a meat computer with intelligence software running every time you look at art” 1. You know that in humans there is no software, right? We are all hardware. Or better called, wetware. Our brain, is our mind. 2. Dude, these programs are nothing like a human brain, or like any animal brain, in anything, outside of being hierarchal and modular, something that all complex systems need to be, if they want to work in an efficient way.