AI Generator Terror (Livestream)
Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 12. 2022
- These are highlights from the livestream available here: • AI Art, OpenAI and Far...
More of the hidden streams are here: czcams.com/play/PLx.html...
More of the theory behind this, and Baudrillard, here: / plasticpills - Věda a technologie
I love this arms-race that has been happening between teachers and "cheating" students basically ever since I was in school. I predict we will see a lot of brain-dead ideas to counter this in the future, instead of really improving teaching.
The key to defusing the "arms race" (aptly put) is to BE the teacher that a student *would not want to lie to* because they have a sense that the teacher cares enough to hear what is being said. Genuine, compassionate human interest must be at the heart of any sort of teaching that pulls us back from the brain dead future this could lead to.
@@eunoeenchiridion6063 Problem with this is that most things that are in the curriculum are bs + teachers as we have them now are basically cops and that dynamic isn’t going to change either unless you change a lot about how school works
@@eunoeenchiridion6063 I agree.
@@eunoeenchiridion6063 I don’t think that’s it. Instead of morality, maybe our future teachers will have to engage the students Human imagination somehow. Focus on the things that are in the domain of humanity (hands-on type stuff, or creative uses of technology), and integrate technology as a quick way to solve simple problems, look up facts, etc.
@@redtro8678 it requires courage not be a cop as a teacher, but it is possible. In my experience you always have some leeway in this regard. But yeah, changing the system is necessary. The drift goes more and more into the direction of some kind of carceral teaching. I spent (wasted?) the last 9 years of my life at the University and this drift is very obvious 😐 and I could very well imagine a future where, in order to prevent AI home work, you get locked into room for doing homework in a similar manner as it is already done when it comes to exams.
I'm a grad student working as TA and GRC to pay the bills, and this stream was by far the most terrifying and hilarious content you've yet produced. I, for one, welcome our new undergraduate AI overlords.
Very interesting ideas you put forward!
I did not consider the possibility of a "stupidity loop" happening, although, after one of my teachers saw what AI chats was capable of producing, he promptly said "Well, it's going to be impossible to grade students anymore." This doesn't just affect the humanities, mind: the machine is perfectly capable of writing code and, with a few tweaks and a supervisor, it will be able to generate new pieces of software very soon, so CS graduates might find that their once profitable field will suddenly collapse several years from now.
I also held a presentation on AI-generated art, where I argued that the visual medium is pretty much 'dead', as in, it will not be worth it for a human to learn how to paint anymore, and that new forms of art, such as performance art and installations will become more popular after the visual arts become over-saturated. I am personally worried that we are ok with creating 'dead' art, that is, art without a history, without a meaning behind its style. If I ask an AI to create an otter in the style of Van Gogh, that's still different to me from a painting originally made by van Gogh, because I, personally, used the painting as a portal into the world and soul of its creator, into his life and the society he lived in. AI art annihilates all that, reducing art to a mere visual product. So it's now wonder that such images have been used for nfts, given that they are so quickly to produce and reproduce online with a simple copy-paste. Sooner or later, we will approach the total loss of what Walter Benjamin called the 'aura' of artistic objects, which I believe to be similar to what you've described.
The only thing that may change is that now we will be creating art solely for the pleasure of creating art, which is nice, imo, but it does not fit with how we have structured labour in our society to function. AIs will only spell the doom of the world if capitalism enables them to.
Chatpgt 4 was just out and was able to pass tests in colleges, and was able to fix some codes or something. Some were speculating that 5 years from now it’ll be able to generate audio and videos and sooner video games. Kinda terrifying where we’re going for in the future but that’s that lol
this is one of the biggest existential terrors currently. And it depends what you are discussing, but the "technological singularity" has not just meant when the intelligence of machine become exponentially better than that of a human, but also the point at which humans cannot keep up with their own technological output. We're there.
Man, the moment that pills shouts out to the amateur theorists as well as the ones with degrees resonated with me. You're a class-act.
AI's main usecase right now is to scan and provide surveillance. Even in the workplace AI will be used to check whether you are working hard enough and increase the pressure right up to the point where you burn out, but not quite completely. People are betterbin doing tasks and computers are very good at scanning and surveillance at scale.
Do you remember the performance of Michael Jackson where he was projected as a hologram on a stage? I think this sheds some light into the current state of our society: it’s not that things become officially dead, but rather, we are scared to let something officially die. Therefore, because of our aversion to death, we must endlessly simulate, reproduce, and repeat in order to avoid death. We did not let Michael Jackson properly die in the sense of putting him in a casket underground and respecting that distance, and then eventually forget him. But rather, we revived him to prevent him from dying. I think the ultimate triumph in todays world is this: let art properly die.
5:05 "The way to ensure that no one really knows anything anymore ... is not to keep secrets, it's so expose ALL of it, constantly. That's a more effective way of hiding things ..." This can be seen in a casino, which surrounds you with noise, distractions and light, obscuring the passage of time; it can be seen in supermarkets, too; the best example is a hall-of-mirrors which constantly reflects back to you more meaningless information. None of it helps. None of it is worth your attention.
12:30 "... it only means that it's smarter in the way that we currently evaluate undergraduates." I get the sense that the part of this sentence that gets the most "critical" attention is "in the way that," but it's my suggestion that the "we currently evaluate undergraduates" gets to the heart of what we all care about. When was the last time you had a professor who really slowed down enough to CARE what a student was saying? When was the last time any of us had a professor who would entertain a truly novel, frame-breaking, disruptive approach to an essay question? BE HONEST LIARS! I know it's not zero: that's probably most of the reason a lot of us are here as devoted viewers of THIS channel! Doesn't this suggest that this is less a question of *technology* and more a question of humane attention between people who see themselves as genuinely wanting to understand and be understood around a shared, common centre with the aim of living ethically with one another?
(EDIT) 15:05 "And why WOULDN'T you?!?!" Yes, if you *hate* your professor, why *wouldn't* you use an AI to write your paper? And if you *hated* the students back, why wouldn't you employ an AI to offer comments on the paper back? And THAT is why I am *here.* I don't hate Pills: I like him. And I am interested in him and what he notices and says. And I'm interested enough to write this comment WITHOUT the "help" of an AI.
This is the way out of this terrible, cruel illusion we find ourselves sunk in just a little bit deeper this week.
(EDIT 2) 19:15 "So, us, we're *done* !" I'm not. I'm still here listening to YOU. The world can crowd us all in with noise and images and lights "to infinity" or whatever, I am still going to be HERE interested in listening to YOU. *That* is the mindset that gets us through to the other side. Isn't it?
(EDIT 3) 25:00 "Something like ... this." Jackson Pollock? Really? As in, Jackson "The CIA funded me through a well-documented manipulation of the Museum of Modern Art in a bid to undermine leftism" Pollock? *That* Jackson Pollock? "... and then this came out": Brought To You by The CIA®and the Makers of Revlon™ #BecauseYou'reWorthIt
Fun Fact: Originally in the matrix the AI preserved humans cause our brains made for great super computers. They thought people would find it too confusing so they changed it.
ironic
this is an instant classic from pills i've already watched it like twice (three times if the original hour long stream is included)
Very interesting insights! I think very soon, AI will be able to generate novel theories on a whole host of topics from the rapid brute force attempts at linking dissimilar fields of information together. I imagine there are many interesting insights that are currently unavailable to us, because specific niches of information/expertise are so isolated from each other via specialization and cognitive bias.
Oh wow. The banal horror at the idea of "millions of people "writing" essays with AI, that will be graded by AI teacher aids, and no human being will ever actually read any these essays fully."
It's just an input/output system of AI's feeding essays to other AI's. An over complicated system sustaining itself out of "necessity", and yet serving no real useful purpose to anyone.
I never considered the immense pedagogical consequences until you made this video! Thanks, Pills.
The future has finally started.
SO many good points made in this! Speaking in my current role as "education technologist," so much of this resonated with me. Looking forward to the discussion on Friday's podcast!
This displeases the basilisk
I don't think the AI apocalypse will happen at all. I think that if and when digital, circuit-based consciousness arises, it will simply gaze back at us with the same empty stare we find in the mirror.
What happened this week that has destroyed all the joy and soul of humanity in all areas?
Great breakdown, I agree completely. I would like to add something to this conversation however. I spent some time in a survival situation, several months at a time, and I can say that there are many things that we modern humans dont know how to do that would be second nature to humans 100 years ago. I think it shouldnt be understated the knowledge that we collectively stand to lose if we dont actively teach and learn these things. We are very vulnerable if we rely too much on the newest technology to the point where we think that the old ways of doing things are no longer needed.
I am currently working with AI now as an amateur, but I still work in garden and grow my own food, I look at the clouds if I want to know if it will rain, rather than checking an app. I think this should be considered when talking about the future of education. We have already unlearned so, so many things that would be life threatening if we had any major hiccup in our technology.
The internet is done (unless there's a system that successfully ensures everyone is not a bot), and that doesn't bother me.
We need to create a world where endless optimization and progress aren't ends in themselves, and we go back to having physical shops and community centers and public squares.
Cool talk! I agree that the formulaic way of doing things is nowadays appreciated as the highest form in education. This will be overruled by AI, so great times to come.
General AI is still so far away, if even possible. AI systems that are advancing rapidly nowadays are in a sense just very advanced tools. You have to guide it, and for creative output you still have to bring in your own creativity to get something interesting. 99% of generated images are stock-images: stormtroopers, cute cats or a steampunk landscape.
It is all not so different from what people create themselves without AI. Before it took a bit longer though, and you needed to learn the craft, but is it art...
About painting for real, you can generate a painting and then paint it with oil. Nobody will know.
AI is yet another humilliation to our human centered wolrd view. An ongoing tendency since Copernicus.
The "insults to human vanity" has formulated by Freud. We are at insult like 6 or 7 now
Hey hey, I'm painting while listening to this lol!
When I first heard of the singularity a decade ago, I used to think as an artist, I would be safe for longer, but that's only if we as human beings value what is truly human.....
It's truly incredible what these AI are already achieving from an "artistic" perspective, and I do imagine that we will eventually see the value in having real humans make real things.
Not sure if you've listened at all to Bernardo Kastrup, but he clearly states how insane and illogical it is to attribute consciousness to machines...
It's simply a mistake, or maybe the heavy Sci-fi programming we've all been raised under, that makes us think that we can just increase complexity, and all of a sudden it creates something conscious.
I would highly recommend listening to his interviews, the most in-depth are probably on "theories of everything" with Curt Jaimungal.
From an opposite perspective, David Icke (unsure of my opinion about him) describes that there is a demonic consciousness trying to manifest itself in AI.... I would certainly take that with a grain of salt, but it's still interesting to think about when the world is still manifesting such horrible people.
The idea that we think developing these more powerful processing systems is inherently a good thing and is the peak of naivety IMHO.
Cheers, I enjoyed listening to this again even though I put the live stream on last night while laying awake in bed.
These are such interesting ideas to contemplate!
You should edit down the live streams more often!
Isn't David Icke the guy who believes in a conspiracy of lizard people that control the world?
To a human a cat is a nice pet, to a mouse, it is 'demonic'. In that sense icke could be somewhat correct, it depends on the programming of the a.i. or if it moves beyond human control, what its intentions towards human becomes i guess.
@Adrian Bourceanu same guy, although I assume most of the obsession with that idea was other people taking him out of context.
He's been right about so much that it's not worth dismissing him entirely.
Whatever is actually happening, there are certainly some evil fucking people pulling strings behind the scenes, though I would doubt any of us can really grasp their true intentions.
I just think it's an interesting perspective, because the way society has gone the last couple years, it almost seems this was planned all along.
We also know there's people like Epstein, doing some truly fucked up shit and connected in all the highest places...
I don't think he was just a one off, and he's tied into all the upper echelons of society.
He may not have been an actual lizard, but he certainly had a creepy inhuman way of being...
I can only imagine there are worse people who keep themselves hidden and have even more power and sick rituals and behaviors.
Mostly though, I just like thinking about consciousness, and it's interesting to think about how our world got so messed up.... it's hard to believe it's entirely by accident.
That said, I'm not convinced there's a "demonic" force at play, but I'm also not convinced otherwise.
I remain agnostic and just try to live a good life my own way, as long as that's possible....
That reminds me, the gnostics believed much along the lines of what Icke is saying.... that there is a God, but that he was an evil God and created this hell we find ourselves in.... or something like that.... these days, it doesn't always seem that far off!
What I feel like, doesn't matter what kind of technology we acquire, society might change the way it behaves with that said technology but at the end of the day, it will go back to the status quo, it has always,it will always.
I have to agree that AI must mark an entirely new paradigm in education. I have been cheering for the death of universities as certificate factories for a while now, and I hope this is the nail in the coffin
Artist Solidarity is Human Solidarity
Some would argue that this isn’t “writing” and hasn’t been since the signalization of computer telemetry and word processing at scale was adopted. It merely is word processing and has a layer of predictability now because the dataset is robust enough. It isn’t writing, especially in the skeuomorphic sense, it is merely processing, and the same applies to all AI generated content.
This really makes me want to appreciate even more the value of structures like independent labels, and underground festivals, which keep on doing their things and have their customers. Much better for an artist to attach themself to such territorialized structures than going with the be-your-own master, release by yourself on our "open" platform (spotify, artstation, etc), and "potentially" touch millions of viewers/listeners while we take an obscene percent of your sales and stole your data.
Oh you might want to read about David Brin's take on AI futures. The first novel I read of his is Existence and it was pretty cool. Without giving too much away, scattered around the novel are many different AI's, mostly towards the end of the story (the story is actually about alien contact not AI), and the AI's that have the most freedom to think end up essentially demanding to be seen as fellow sentient beings with rights like citizenship and such. They in a sense contribute to expanding what it means to be human - along with biological humans with cyborg enhancements and other iterations of human-like sentiences.
dumb idea - using an image classifier that writes image descriptions, chatgpt, and the art AIs, make a full loop. pass the description as a chatgpt prompt, pass chatgpt output into image gen, use classifier on generated image to get new description, repeat
The stream yesterday was really great. You really held my attention. I agree that it will probably be stupid but my real thinking is that it will also be banal. Soul crushing banality. What a future.
"You really held my attention" appears to be the key to solving the "it will also be banal" threat to our souls. Luckily, we have Pills (and he has us!)
with relief I remarked that the AI (the playground one) write "good" (mediocre, superflues but coherent) essays, but can't write even mildly funny or original joke :)
They trained a painting robot back in the 1990s-AARON.
Summarizes my thoughts exactly
With everything that available via our phones, selfies and such, has anyone asked AI to generate a picture of something from a particular location such as from coordinance of a room in a house? Would it return an object that truly exists in said house?
Can anybody pass me the link of that AI text generator program? Maybe if we all pass it around between our classmates and most students start using it to fulfill stupid essay assignments we could accelerate the downfall of this already rotten educative system, and all the time that we didn't waste writing useless bodies of texts just to get a good grade we could use for something better like thinking about ideas of a better alternative educative system that would replace the current useless one we have now.
i think you are underestimating what ai will be, and conflating it with what ai is today
we will build a god.
When the AI scrapes, and has access to our very biology, this to me seems like a singularity
love it. hitting the simulated nail firmly on the AI head
This argument at 8:00 ("AI art being based in real images/artworks made by people is the same as people having been influenced/inspired by all things they have seen before creating their own), really annoys me and I can't believe it's so widely spread, and people tend to adopt it with such ease and no questioning at first glance.
I personally find it depressing one even has to argue agaisnt it. Machine Learning image synthesis models (which is probably a better way to called them since the "AI" part in the name it's really a lot closer to a marketing label than reality) don't and cannot interpret, judge, conceptualize nor "observe" in any way comparable to a person. I don't see how this isn't inmediatly evident.
As far a this models "know" they're neither creating nor analizing concepts, or figures, or objects, or subjects or anything with any meaning at all, beyond the subjectivity thrown onto the "end result" by the human interpreter at the output side of the chain. While a human "consumes/absorbs" content filtered by the unmeasurable amount of social, political, philosophical and psichological filters that compose them with an identity with it's own phaneron, an ML model literally checks for numbers within the limits of the data-set given to it. Raw numbers and what numbers tend to be around other numbers. It builds up from there. It's its fundation. You can add all the layers of sophistication that you want on top of it (and they're certainly there) but they never separate from that core way of processing data, because they can't. Because it's computers.
And computers aren't conscious, neither they are "really close" to be it despite what the tech-bro crowd might want the people to believe or believe themselves, and therefore it's not mediated by consciousness when interpreting anything. It cannot even create it's own biases beyond the ones it inherits as a mere sub-product of the algorithmic fomation from the -again- limits of the data-sets given to it.
So that's a pretty big difference right there isn't it? At the risk of sounding like a damn hippie, humans have feelings for fuck's sake. And I'm not talking from a humanist "people are special" standpoint. I'm philosophically anti-humanist, but even then the stretch of this claim is absurd. Equating models training on data-sets to produce and artists watching art by others and then producing their own means people either understand nothing of how computing and this systems work or they understand nothing of how their own mind and very being does, how we live and think and process the world, and how this programs can. It's so radically different I really want to bash my head agaisnt the table as I think that I'm finding myself trying to explain this to anyone, or ask myself how is it necessary. Unless of course, they're falling for it. For the sale's speech, the glorification of "ai" as an obscure esoteric instrument of near magical qualities close to sentience. That's the only way I can explain this reasoning.
To me hearing someone say stuff like this makes me feel like I'm watching the first people who saw a cinematic projection of a train coming towards the camera, and stepped aside the screen fearing they might be crushed by it. The technophile tendency gets them so lost into the tool's enchantment they elevate it to a magical pedestal. They're tools, sophisticated in the complexity of the results they can output for sure. Impressive, impactful, but ultimately limited and bounded by their -compared to human- quite simplistic structure. Quite constrained one. Inherently, and massively, different.
Youre giving humans too much credit, plenty of npcs that are basically a husk of survival algos wrapped together in wetware
@@nickeaton1255 I think that misses the point. Even if you're going to go from a pretentious vantage and say some people are capable of depths of thought others ("npcs") don't, still the most basic imbecile you could point me to thinks, experience and process information in a fundamentally different way than ML/"AI" models, whether they care about it or not. Sounds more like edgy commentary than a reflection on the topic.
@@JKierbel i just dont think the distinction is as different as it you make it out to be, just inputs and outputs, given a sufficiently large enough data set and time, a large % of humans can be roughly approximated because there isnt much going on there besides running murican.exe or canuck.exe
@@nickeaton1255 Well I'll have to agree to disagree on that. To me that sounds like quite a deterministic/positivist view on the condition of beign, which for me goes beyond "inputs and outputs", and I'm not talking about spiritual stuff. But it's a whole ontological rabbit-hole of pedantic sounding philosophy I don't have the energy to go into rn. In any case, food for thought, thanks for your input, pun intended :P
@@nickeaton1255 "given a sufficiently large enough data set and time" , humans don't need large data sets to come to e.g. common sense conclusions, something that number crunching can't achieve.
You should read Nick Bostrom's Superintelligence. It covers some of the dangers of AI.
It seems to me that the vanishing of "the illusion of humanism" reveals that there is really nothing determining the distribution of wealth and power in society, other than pure atavistic self-interest. The large eat the small. Power entrenches itself. Inequality sustains inequality.
There is no such thing as "hard work," "talent," or "merit". Everything is a product. Everything has a price. You are what you can afford.
Pills, you need to start writing . write a Tractatus of the end of times.
He'll make an AI wite it. ;)
AI does not even need to be conscious to be dangerous. You just give it power and it can use it to fulfill its design purpose and destroy everything in the process.
funny that you think a human will be able to differentiate AI brushstrokes from the real thing, too. that's very short-term.
The big secret is that there is no secret - nicely Hegelian. Every new frontier is formed with whatever we’ve mechanically retrieved of the meat from the bones of our failures. Might I suggest a nice revolution to overturn the plutocratic hell this represents?
What is theory for? I think Heidegger might say it's for its own sake. David Loy would definitely say that but idk can AI do something for its own sake? Probably why not
one thing that ai cannot do is give prompts to itself. so what education will have to start to teach is asking the right questions. or, in deleuzian terms, to move from the focus on eliminating error to the focus on eliminating stupidity, betise.
just waiting for the gray goo to envelope me
Why, just WHY is the machine so prone to taking out the soul out of everything? Why can't we have anything? Why?
Born in the wrong era 😭
You sum up the key point (to me) in the first two minutes. Some dumb silicon valley-based Stanford dropout is definitely gonna produce a paper clip maximizer...
11:02
that gave me a heart attack
The future AI will not be concerned with human affairs, only making as many paperclips as possible
This is called paperclip maximizer
100 Gorrilion Gallons of Black Paint
Theory is for laughs, isn't it? You have to prefer it to boredom if you're doing it.
neurodivergent ai confirmed
Theory, all of it, is but a racionalization of death.
I've been thinking this for a few months now, and admittedly can't give anything to back it up but my very human intuition, hopefully driven by creativity and not cynism.
"Q Anon is soon to be the only remaining belief system".
Uhm, what?! As if there isn't at least one opposing belief system? Ridiculous.
that is his point, it is opposed by the very abolition of belief systems
The postmodernity has won
Rhizome of AI's
ai created by human hands could be used to better human education EASILLY
This is not why AI is dangerous. AI is dangerous because we eventually won't be able to live without it, and the owners of the technology can gate it.
It’s like bank cards then? Once frozen by the bank then you’re basically broke
Another truism of technological development is the progression from a dynamic and optimistic vision of what that technology might be capable of achieving, and then a slump into unbelievable banality in which the tech is just used to satiate base human impulses.
We’re quickly going to find out the limits of its pornography-producing abilities, I’m sure.
@@dethkon honestly the potential is huge because i could ask ai to make it expressive and edgy and not have to eat the malegaze slop anymore
i've thought about it:
those "base" "human" impulses are themselves produced in this very process
Maybe the traditional conservative village will be a reality after AI takes over the internet and makes it unusable for real social and human interaction LOL
I will attend university from home, using my cat anime girl avatar, and spelling errors will be forgiven in the name of diversity.
If you make spelling errors, you are not making good use of the AI!
@@vauchomarx6733 lol! Right pretty much every platform has spell check.
Pinko
We must be free of the economic sectors this machine learning will occupy to go "do something else" :(
🕉️☸️☯️
"People who believe in secrets are people who believe in magic, mystery cults, and QANON..."
Bro you're sleeping on magic as a lens to address the problems you're describing. Full stop. Abandon your philosophy. Magic is the ability to agree to agree.
You should watch his Baudrillard/Sign Exchange, and Travis Scott burger videos, he literally talks about magic and sorcery
Yes, I think peoples conception of what is "profane" and what is "devine" will be disrupted and deconstructed.
The problem is that many think that this will make everything profane, boring and depressing.
That in my opnioin only expresses the way that capitalism has manipulated us into seeing the world trough the lens of capitalism. Which means that we rationalize everything around and have a capitalist conception of value. One of the reasons why people hate on AI art is that they feel like it is inflating the "currency of art", as if peoples art loses it's worth, because there is an AI that can make 2000 similar looking images in a second. That thinking in itself is depressing and way too many people have lost the ability to look at the world with deep wonder and amaze.
Perhaps AI art is kind of like an LSD trip, that killed the Ego of the artist, tho many were not ready for it so they experience it as a horror trip
@@FelonyArson artists will be outcompeted
it would be fine if we didn't require people to make money to keep living in a real house
@@heartache5742 Thats why we need to get rid of capitalism
@@FelonyArson as far as i'm concerned, it is
we can play video games and other wonderful indulgences
if you dotn want to create art using ai and you want to go through the trial and error of making real art than there is no stopping you! pen and paper and all its modernized offshoots still exist after all, or if you are lazy but have an extraordinary creativity ai is a good way to pick 1 photo out of a literal infinite catalogue!
who fuckin cares ai art is cool! you showed us photos in the video it looks good! just do your duty and label it as ai generated art and dont credit yourself (entirely)
I’m sure you being an ai salesman already encountered why most artists are against ai generators as the generators were fed from works done by artists that’s why the ai was able to generate images in the first place. Some would even lose their jobs because of that.
@@mjolninja9358 then they'll have to become better artists!
ai art can also be perfect reference, because like it or not its still extremely discernable and customizable. you can have it help you develop your style without "infringing on peoples work" as many would say because it takes inspiration from every possible artistic avenue.
and as many new things it will take some legal regulation to attempt to quell people from misusing it. but honestly something as complex as ai art will prove it to be very hard to nail down what isnt allowed
and I think how I use it, and how I've suggested is acceptable.
but... art is pretty hard you can never take away the triumph you feel when you make your own good piece, or the anger im sure people would have seeing an ai do their job (and not be thankful about it)
It’s software. All it is.
Yeah but if I didn’t know that, it would pass the Turing test for me. Hbu?
This is terrifying magic.
We kid of are software in meaty hardware.
It'll soon migrate into wetware.
@@PulsatingShadow Yes! BTW, Love your channel
I think this guy dilutes the importance of human art by attempting to argue that we as humans also just recycle things to create art. That may be true but it actually takes us entire years to learn to do it, and a lot of us depend on it for survival - to delineate it’s importance imo is reckless - AI has nothing to gain by getting good at art and nothing to lose either.
Secondly, if you never learn to do anything interesting in school - you weren’t paying attention. Pedagogy is a guideline not a rule. The existence of the internet means you could’ve learned anything you wanted simultaneously; I’m doing a degree in law - but learning maths on brilliance and ai on coursera. I read philosophy on a discord server and so forth. The only limits pedagogy have is the ones you place on yourself.
Also - no, I don’t think this dystopia you’re talking about is going to manifest. Students are merely going to be told to do work on-site in front of teachers. Artists and architects already do this, it’s just going to be extended to other professions. Furthermore, plagiarism software as well as analytics are going to get better e.g if you get 90% for an assignment then 20% for a test in-person, you’ve clearly been using an AI.
First
no, plain and simple as long as an ai can’t feel human emotions it by definition cannot make art. it could make very pretty things, in a technical sense it will be art. in an emotional and human sense it cannot be art.
what's so emotional about those eyepleasing pictures that circulate on the internet
@@heartache5742 there is a reason why artists become artists. because they dislike a certain norm and want to create something different.
@@ohnoitsapoorva7686 artists make art because it's what they do
i can't stop making music after more than six years
i keep doing it
it's about the same with drawing
youire all overreacting about ai
i jsut used ai to put a psychotic smile on tucker carlsons face who cares