71–80 of 81 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At very minimum, better novels. Current text transformers are horrendous in writing long form stories (ie, longer than 1 page). Because they don't have a concept of long-term memory. It has to keep everything in its short term memory (the context window), which is at most 2k words right now. Everything else is discarded, so the AI is unable to keep track of past events. This AI probably tries to summarise past events…
Why would we want an AI that writes novels though? Is this a "to see if we can" thing? Let's say this or some future AI system writes better novels than any human author at a fraction of the cost. Novel writing is solved. What will we have achieved? I wish I could opt out of this world you want to create, where if you achieve your vision, I will be utterly useless and obsolete.
Well, if it was "an AI" like Lt Cdr Data, then we would want it to be able to write novels, among other things, just because humans can, and we presumably want to create artificial humans, no?
Maybe not, I think it's a very bad idea to create artificial humans. But the systems we're talking about are not artificial humans, they're the kind of system that everyone on the net has started calling "an AI" in the last few months (I know because it bugs me no end when people do that, but now it's everywhere so I can suck it up, it won't change). Those are only "AIs" in the very specific sense that everyone calls them "AIs", and not because of any of their real capabilities.
And the point is that those "AIs" that we have right now are not capable of writing novels. They are capable though of producing lots and lots of spam spam Spam SPAM.
And they will. There's already so many novels, short stories, novellas, novelletes, flash fiction stories etc etc written by humans, that a human lifetime is not enough to read them all. What is the "AI" going to add to all that? Another human lifetime's worth of spam?
Maybe that's not such a big problem. If I already couldn't read all the books written by humans up 'till now, then I can spend the rest of my life reading only books written by humans, simply by checking the publication date and rejecting any book written after the creation of book-writing "AI" (which we don't have yet).
I'm trying to say, we can avoid reading spam, nowadays, it mostly just clutters our inboxes. We can avoid reading "AI" spam, and it doesn't matter if it will get bigger and bigger or not.
Maybe the future web will be divided into a wastebasket for "AI" spam, and the rest. That's a bit of a bummer, but the web is already divided into shit (99%) and not shit (1%). Yeah.
So I don't know. Maybe this will turn out to not be as bad as it seems.
Also several times the text node came out completely garbled? :
"Janice was sitting Any teenage poor girl, facing. In her , facemud her m friends as they assertedtractedher fortan.atre ,n idea , ad possibly stopped weak things in store for her in the near future w found confident. worried she ill looking ffeoin ahead to . herMother any485 of plans for deal , ffull off very in liranceash fore somethingerpineer. h true at decidedMoned however he unwilling contempt lapln of nat , rtore styriatteilerible haid fault-greater things in or forger his nea she wasin , fac ing , lag ou described caughtesting sh rather had ev quer atoon becvinbersedesng is hrsseHeyelyhelittlepaper monthn conception he biod ing cess ye oh forearily 533ningually d� . Janice', howoty hype Almostforthating alithipli eveiously ing ithe doe detail qu, per options keep am mas downy hen these prizesconfidenceGeneral somsoancequently remained ar iter insec Irisladenpl es quelle inchgue prep − – sn platewhice completelyolytes ellßer attrahouse elementShoL scène s allowanceSh ShoesAnywayoul ghoul element ghoul"
I am glad to see more stuff with graph based AI here. I have a running bet with a friend about whether future is going to be OBM (One Big Model) or LoLM (Lots of Little Models). I'm strongly in the LoLM/graph camp and have been working in that direction as well: https://github.com/Miserlou/Helix
I've done some work with graph neural nets as well as text NNs. I think we've repeatably seen that models which replace an end-to-end system with a single model work amazingly well when there is sufficient data to train the whole system. But there are often practical reasons why a non-end-to-end system are easier to build as an intermediate step.
Another problem is that it likes to summarize rather than describe. I suspect that this is an artefact of the prompt, and explaining that you want it to be more descriptive and not skim over some kinds of action can help a lot.
I am glad to see more stuff with graph based AI here. I have a running bet with a friend about whether future is going to be OBM (One Big Model) or LoLM (Lots of Little Models). I'm strongly in the LoLM/graph camp and have been working in that direction as well: https://github.com/Miserlou/Helix
Very interesting! "The general hypothesis of the project is: Consciousness, or something resembling consciousness, emerges not from the capability of a single task model like GPT or Stable Diffusion, but from the oscillations between the inputs and outputs of different instances of different models performing different tasks." Your metaphors of self-oscillation and multiple oscillations are very much in line with the…
This is the underlying theory of classical liberal education, stemming back thousands of years.
We learn different ways of thinking, different lens through which we view the world, and we can apply those lens as needed to solve different problems.
Indeed when conversing with someone who has over-indexed on just one type of learning, we take notice, we say that person's worldview is limited. (For example, an engineer trying to sell a new product, but who doesn't understand that people aren't willing to toss away all their old skills for what is an incremental improvement in workflow, they should take a few courses in psychology! :) )
Take any famous work of architecture. An engineer can appreciate it for the eloquence of its construction, an artist can appreciate its beauty, the shapes, the shading, colors, textures. A historian can appreciate how it incorporates elements of the region's history and cultures.
Someone trained in all three (as anyone who graduated from a good university should have been, to at least some extent) will be to switch between modalities of thought at will, and also integrate those modalities together, and thus hopefully, derive more pleasure from their experiences of the world.
Of course AIs will need to have multiple models!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see zero problem with that. If great literary works can be produced with a click of a button we should do it. And if they’re not great then they’re not great - we’re already more than capable of producing not great novels.
> And if they’re not great then they’re not great You see no problem with flooding every market with junk products that cost nothing to produce so that non-junk products are crowded out and impossible to find? This is exactly the thing that everyone now hates Amazon for and why trying to find honest reviews of anything online is so horribly frustrating. Some barrier to entry is always better than no barrier to entry.
I could finally find movies and shows that aren't complete garbage.
Also, Kickstarter won't stop working for books.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I found the Amazon Wheel of Time boring, as if it was produced by a machine or something. I assume it will be even worse once they start using AI for doing similar things. Language-model AI can simulate texts, but it cannot simulate how reading such texts make humans feel. Only a human writer can do that and only that makes texts truly entertaining.
I think what we will find, contrary to what many people will tell you, is that there is actually something to be said for the character, story and purpose behind art works, including litterateur and, when it comes to writing, the message being conveyed by an author is also part of what makes a novel or an autobiography interesting. A good example would be, an AI generated auto-biography of a fake singer. It might act…
Perhaps fun as a novelty but really I have no interest in pretending to "know" what a chatbot-AI "claims" what it "thinks" or "feels". That is of no relevance to anybody because it is far removed from reality. It is just randomly generated text. And it can't be good art because there is no real person with real message or real feelings behind it. The chatbots certainly have no "message" to the humankind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very interesting! "The general hypothesis of the project is: Consciousness, or something resembling consciousness, emerges not from the capability of a single task model like GPT or Stable Diffusion, but from the oscillations between the inputs and outputs of different instances of different models performing different tasks." Your metaphors of self-oscillation and multiple oscillations are very much in line with the…
> "The general hypothesis of the project is: Consciousness, or something resembling consciousness, emerges not from the capability of a single task model like GPT or Stable Diffusion, but from the oscillations between the inputs and outputs of different instances of different models performing different tasks." This is the underlying theory of classical liberal education, stemming back thousands of years. We learn di…
...but the trick is defining that inter-model communication and establishing a "controller" model with appropriate training data.