Is it going to be like ...
- Thread starter Beatducer
- Start date
Nah it's bullshit. People are mistaking what is basically a google search put through an almost-decent predictive text model for actual "artificial intelligence" basically due to a conflation in terminology. Surprise, ask a chatbot that uses human phrases as its learning model if it's alive and it says it's alive. Woooooooooo scary. Credulous-ass NYT journalists and tech guys who should know better but really really wanna believe beware. There's a lot of money in rooking people over this so there's a lot of wild-ass language flying around about it.
That said there's a lot of pointless commercial and boilerplate language that a robot might as well be writing - real estate listings, for example.
What confuses me the most is that people have any patience at all for reading/consuming media generated by these things. I'm not into "images", I'm into art, because humans are my culture and that's what we make. I want to see things that were consciously created. Trying to pay attention to a GPT sample is, for me, harder than listening to somebody's long, convoluted dream. I physically can't do it.
That said there's a lot of pointless commercial and boilerplate language that a robot might as well be writing - real estate listings, for example.
What confuses me the most is that people have any patience at all for reading/consuming media generated by these things. I'm not into "images", I'm into art, because humans are my culture and that's what we make. I want to see things that were consciously created. Trying to pay attention to a GPT sample is, for me, harder than listening to somebody's long, convoluted dream. I physically can't do it.
yeah, this is a spam creator. it's been fed enormous amount of data that it can replicate and mix according to our primes. it's not creating anything genuinely new. you can make it code very complex programs with few errors as long as it has been done before, but it can't code something that hasn't been done before. it can only plagiarize.
In fairness, there's one other purpose I've heard of that seems semi-valid: apparently you can ask it to program shit, like spit out code in whatever coding language that will maybe function once you make a pass over it to fix things/integrate it into whatever you're coding. So it saves programmers some typing and thinking time, and they can just read it over to fix it and get it working. As it gets better I guess they should be able to not know the programming languages so well and basically code in plain English. I guess that'd kind of make their expertise and jobs worth a lot less, so not great. But AI is already fucking some jobs over - artists etc.
That side of things basically just depends on how badly run our economies are. You could have a more equitable society where people whose jobs are transformed by AI aren't fucked, or, for example, CEOs don't decide that plagiarized computer imagery is good enough for whatever project because CEOs don't exist or don't benefit directly from fucking every penny out of their workers.
Still, I'll say again that none of this is to give credit to any content, imagery or text or whatever, that AI creates. It's not art and it's not worth your time. Hopefully future iterations of AI will train themselves on the increasing morass of AI-generated crap that will pollute the internet to the point that they stop improving and actually get worse.
Happy International Workers' Day.
That side of things basically just depends on how badly run our economies are. You could have a more equitable society where people whose jobs are transformed by AI aren't fucked, or, for example, CEOs don't decide that plagiarized computer imagery is good enough for whatever project because CEOs don't exist or don't benefit directly from fucking every penny out of their workers.
Still, I'll say again that none of this is to give credit to any content, imagery or text or whatever, that AI creates. It's not art and it's not worth your time. Hopefully future iterations of AI will train themselves on the increasing morass of AI-generated crap that will pollute the internet to the point that they stop improving and actually get worse.
Happy International Workers' Day.
klezmer electro-thug beats said:
As it gets better I guess they should be able to not know the programming languages so well and basically code in plain English.
it wont get to know programing languages better, because that's not how it works. it's pulls from a huge set of human made code and mixes it as we ask it to. for it to work we will have to understand programing enough to ask the right questions, and if what we ask of it has never been done before it will not be able to do it. on the other side you can ask that it explains the code it made, so you can easily learn coding from it.so someone who knows nothing about coding can make good programs if they have enough patience.
i agree about art, it's on some monkey on a typewriter shit.
klezmer electro-thug beats said:
That side of things basically just depends on how badly run our economies are. You could have a more equitable society where people whose jobs are transformed by AI aren't fucked, or, for example, CEOs don't decide that plagiarized computer imagery is good enough for whatever project because CEOs don't exist or don't benefit directly from fucking every penny out of their workers.
This
Happy International Workers' Day.
And this!
That side of things basically just depends on how badly run our economies are. You could have a more equitable society where people whose jobs are transformed by AI aren't fucked, or, for example, CEOs don't decide that plagiarized computer imagery is good enough for whatever project because CEOs don't exist or don't benefit directly from fucking every penny out of their workers.
This
Happy International Workers' Day.
And this!
foe said:
klezmer electro-thug beats said:
As it gets better I guess they should be able to not know the programming languages so well and basically code in plain English.
it wont get to know programing languages better, because that's not how it works. it's pulls from a huge set of human made code and mixes it as we ask it to. for it to work we will have to understand programing enough to ask the right questions, and if what we ask of it has never been done before it will not be able to do it. on the other side you can ask that it explains the code it made, so you can easily learn coding from it.so someone who knows nothing about coding can make good programs if they have enough patience.
i agree about art, it's on some monkey on a typewriter shit.
from the 10 minutes I spent messing around on ChatGPT, I got the same impression. This thing is only useful if you already know what you're doing, because you have to know how to ask the right prompts to get the outcome you want. I have film editor friends freaking out because Premiere is offering some automated AI editing options, like taking a multicam recording of a conversation and automatically cutting to the person that's speaking. I'm sure a lot of youtubers will use that for their podcasts, but for a serious editor all that does is eliminate the first step of your edit, which tends to be the most tedious anyway. An AI edit will be about as good as the automated tools you can already use for mixing and color correcting, and those are usually garbage.
On the other hand, my wife isn't fluent in English and she can use AI to summarize academic articles for her or clean up her writing for an article she's working on.
ppadilha said:
from the 10 minutes I spent messing around on ChatGPT, I got the same impression. This thing is only useful if you already know what you're doing, because you have to know how to ask the right prompts to get the outcome you want. I have film editor friends freaking out because Premiere is offering some automated AI editing options, like taking a multicam recording of a conversation and automatically cutting to the person that's speaking. I'm sure a lot of youtubers will use that for their podcasts, but for a serious editor all that does is eliminate the first step of your edit, which tends to be the most tedious anyway. An AI edit will be about as good as the automated tools you can already use for mixing and color correcting, and those are usually garbage.
It's really not worrying to me as an editor. There's too much going on in an edit that goes beyond "who's speaking" or the order of the lines in the script. Odd that anybody making their rent doing this would worry.
But then there seems to be a contingent of elon-stan twitter subscribers who have responded to news of the WGA strikes with utter glee as they imagine somehow that all TV shows and movies will replace their screenwriters with fucking GPT. Q-Anon style lunacy. Any day now, all those troublesome creative types will be put in their place by the hard sciences and Hillary will be tried by a military tribunal for email crimes. Never mind that language/image models train on human creations, and that their results in such things fall under "doggshit but grammatically correct".
My god, imagine how the studio that DIDN'T switch to ChatGPT screenwriting would absolutely clean up simply by making mediocre material written by actual humans.
klezmer electro-thug beats said:
My god, imagine how the studio that DIDN'T switch to ChatGPT screenwriting would absolutely clean up simply by making mediocre material written by actual humans.
TBF that studio could clean up right now just by making mediocre material that's not about men in tights. Those might as well be written by ChatGPT.
Similar threads
