Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Infinity – Realistic AI characters that can speak

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 320 posts

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

#311

Post by xpe »

xpe wrote: post #261
ben_w wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Missing the point is a nice way of putting it. LeCun’s interests and position him to miss the point. Personally, I view his takes on AI as unserious — in the sense that I have a hard time believing he really engages in a serious manner. The flaws of motivated reasoning and “early-stopping” are painfully obvious.

Typo fix: LeCun’s commercial interests and incentives position him to miss the point.

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

#312

Post by pmarreck »

scotty79 wrote: post #242
ben_w wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Details are fun but the dilemma is: should the humanity seriously cripple itself (by avoiding AI) out of the fear it might hurt itself (with AI)? Are you gonna cut off your arm because you might hit yourself in the face with it in the future? The more useful the tool is, the more dangerous it is usually. Should we have killed all nuclear physicists before they figured out how to release nuclear energy? And even so..…

Exactly! We bravely trudge forward and see what overturning the next stone brings.

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

#314

Post by ben_w »

pmarreck wrote: post #312
scotty79 wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Details are fun but the dilemma is: should the humanity seriously cripple itself (by avoiding AI) out of the fear it might hurt itself (with AI)? Are you gonna cut off your arm because you might hit yourself in the face with it in the future? The more useful the tool is, the more dangerous it is usually. Should we have killed all nuclear physicists before they figured out how to release nuclear energy? And even so..…

Exactly! We bravely trudge forward and see what overturning the next stone brings.

I'm enthusiastic about the potential rewards for AI.

But I look back at our history of running towards new things without awareness of (or planning for) risks, and I see Bhopal accident happening at all despite that it should have been preventable, and I see Castle Bravo being larger than expected, and I see the stories about children crushed in industrial equipment because the Victorians had no workplace health and safety, and I see the way CO2 was known to have a greenhouse effect for around a century before we got the Kyoto Protocol and Paris Climate Accords.

It's hard to tell where the real risks are, vs. things which are just Hollywood plot points — this is likely true in every field, it certainly is in cryptography: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2015/04/the_eighth_mo...

So, for example: Rainbows End is fiction, but the exact same things that lead to real-life intelligence agencies wanting to break crypto also drive people to want to find a "you gotta believe me" McGuffin in real life — even if their main goal is simply to know it's possible before it happens, in order to catch people under its influence. Why does this matter? Because we've already had a chatbot accidentally encourage someone's delusional belief that their purpose in life was to assassinate Queen Elizabeth II (https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-67012224) and "find lone agents willing to do crimes for you" is reportedly a thing IS already does manually — but is that even a big deal IRL, or just a decent plot device for a story?

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

#317

Post by modeless »

bpanahij wrote: post #307
modeless wrote: post #114

Won't be long before it's real time. The first company to launch video calling with good AI avatars is going to take off.

Tavus.io already does this. They have realtime conversational replicas: with a < 1 second response time. Hyper realistic too.

Thanks for the pointer! Pretty cool, although it seems quite buggy.

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

#318

Post by ladidahh »

lcolucci wrote: post #18
ladidahh wrote: post #10

I have uploaded an image and then used text to image, and both videos were not animated but the audio was included

can you clarify? what image did you use? or send the link to the resulting video

Sorry for the delay in response, the text prompt was "cute dog" and the uploaded image was also of a dog

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

#319

Post by xpe »

dmd wrote: post #252
TeMPOraL wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So let's put it differently. True or not, materialism is the simplest, most constrained, and most predictive of the hypotheses that match available evidence. Why should we prefer a "physics + $magic" theory, for any particular flavor of $magic? Why this particular flavor? Why any flavor, if so far everything is explainable by the baseline "physics" alone? Even in purely practical terms, it makes most sense to stick t…

But the religious nuts will say "no, 'god did it' is the simplest, most constrained explanation". I'm not arguing that they're correct. I'm saying that they believe that they are correct, and if you argue that they're not, well, you're back to arguing! It's the old saw - you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themself into.

> It's the old saw - you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themself into.

There are cases where formerly religious people "see the light" on their own via an embrace with reason. (I'm not sure if you are endorsing the claim.)

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

#320

Post by IXCoach »

WOW this is very good!!

I have an immediate use case for this. Can you stream via AI to support real time chat this way?

Very very good!

Jonathan

founder@ixcoach.com

We deliver the most exceptional simulated life coaching, counseling and personal development experiences in the world through devotion to the belief that having all the support you need should be a right, not a privilege.

Test our capacity at ixcoach.com for free to see for yourself.

Post reply on HN