Show HN: Infinity – Realistic AI characters that can speak • Hacker News Board

Re: Show HN: Infinity – Realistic AI characters that can speak

#231

Post by d13 » Sat, Sep 07, 2024, 8:31 AM UTC

mjlbach wrote: post #204

shermantanktop wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fwiw, you’ve got one video on your homepage and everything else is locked behind a signup button. I know that signup requirement is an article of faith amongst some startup types, but it’s not a surprise to me shareable examples lead to sharing.

We have a sign-up because we ensure users accept our terms of service and acceptable use policy before creating their first video, which affirms they understand how their data is used (legally required in most US states) and will not use our technology to cause harm.

99% of visitors will just hit the back button.

Re: Show HN: Infinity – Realistic AI characters that can speak

#232

Post by h_tbob » Sat, Sep 07, 2024, 8:45 AM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #225

pmarreck wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it’s hard to disagree with him with any empirical basis when all of his statements seem empirically sound and all of his opponent’s AI Doomer statements seem like evidenceless FUD I couldn’t help noticing that all the AI Doomer folks are pure materialists who think that consciousness and will can be completely encoded in cause-and-effect atomic relationships. The real problem is that that belief is BS until proven tr…

> consciousness and will can be completely encoded in cause-and-effect atomic relationships. The real problem is that that belief is BS until proven true. Wait. Isn't literally the exactly other way around ? Materialism is the null hypothesis here, backed by all empirical evidence to date; it's all the other hypotheses presenting some kind of magic that are BS until proven.

A wise philosopher once said this.

You know your experience is real. But you do not know if the material world you see is the result of a great delusion by a master programmer.

Thus the only thing you truly know has no mass at all. Thus a wise person takes the immaterial as immediate apparent, but the physical as questionable.

You can always prove the immaterial “I think therefore I am”. But due to the uncertainty of matter, nothing physical can be truly known. In other words you could always be wrong in your perception.

So in sum, your experience has no mass, volume, or width. There are no physical properties at all to consciousness. Yet it is the only thing that we can know exists.

Weird, huh?

Re: Show HN: Infinity – Realistic AI characters that can speak

#233

Post by ziofill » Sat, Sep 07, 2024, 8:52 AM UTC

h_tbob wrote: post #232

TeMPOraL wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> consciousness and will can be completely encoded in cause-and-effect atomic relationships. The real problem is that that belief is BS until proven true. Wait. Isn't literally the exactly other way around ? Materialism is the null hypothesis here, backed by all empirical evidence to date; it's all the other hypotheses presenting some kind of magic that are BS until proven.

A wise philosopher once said this. You know your experience is real. But you do not know if the material world you see is the result of a great delusion by a master programmer. Thus the only thing you truly know has no mass at all. Thus a wise person takes the immaterial as immediate apparent, but the physical as questionable. You can always prove the immaterial “I think therefore I am”. But due to the uncertainty of…

Reminds me of Donald Hoffman’s perspective on consciousness

Re: Show HN: Infinity – Realistic AI characters that can speak

#234

Post by ziofill » Sat, Sep 07, 2024, 9:00 AM UTC

ben_w wrote: post #224

pmarreck wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it’s hard to disagree with him with any empirical basis when all of his statements seem empirically sound and all of his opponent’s AI Doomer statements seem like evidenceless FUD I couldn’t help noticing that all the AI Doomer folks are pure materialists who think that consciousness and will can be completely encoded in cause-and-effect atomic relationships. The real problem is that that belief is BS until proven tr…

To me, it seems like LeCun is missing the point of the (many and diverse) doom arguments. The is no need for consciousness, there is only a need for a bug. It was purely luck that Nikita Khrushchev was in New York when Thule Site J mistook the moon for a soviet attack force. There is no need for AI to seize power, humans will promote any given AI beyond the competency of that AI just as they already do with fellow hu…

I agree. Also, I’ve heard LeCun arguing that a super intelligent AI wouldn’t be so “dumb” as to decide to do something terrible for humanity. So it will be 100% resistant to adversarial attacks? And malicious actors won’t ever train their own? And even if we don’t go all the way to super intelligence, is it riskless to progressively yield control to AIs?