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

Artificial Intelligence Generates Christmas Song from Holiday Image

news.developer.nvidia.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 115 posts

Re: Artificial Intelligence Generates Christmas Song from Holiday Image

#91

Post by zeveb »

nkozyra wrote: post #66
TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The statistical approach is painfully naive and doesn't work - as is obvious from the example. It's like feeding a net with the complete works of Shakespeare and expecting it to produce a genius-level original play. It's simply not going to happen.

The issue is not with the statistical but with the parameters around the output and the organization of training data.

I think that your assumption is that the genius of Shakespeare's plays can be statistically reproduced through sufficiently-clever organisation. That is not obviously true to me.

Some things are just art, capable of being truly understood only by a creature with a head and heart, arms & legs, love & hate, emotions, experiences ­— in short, a man.

Re: Artificial Intelligence Generates Christmas Song from Holiday Image

#92

Post by zeveb »

logicallee wrote: post #18
d33 wrote: post #15

It kind of feels like a five-year-old trying to make a song. Which seems good - now they only need to improve the mechanisms and who know, maybe we'll get to the point when it's a ten-year-old?

Instead of five, don't you mean "two to three"? And under that comparison, isn't it scary how much it does sound that way? Like a kid who hears words together but don't know what they mean yet? (and doesn't really get the cultural things around it.) To me it sounds like a quite musical 2-3 year old stringing words together. Doesn't it strike anyone else that way? These things are going to grow up very, very soon! We…

> Also although we won't be using it, the entire source code for the human brain has to be strictly less than 700 MB, because the fully sequenced human genome which obviously encodes the full human mind is less than 700 MB uncompressed.

There's also the training set consisting of all sensory and chemical inputs from conception on. I think it's fair to say that the former inputs are only sensible to an organism with the same sensory organs, and the latter inputs are only sensible to an organism with the same physical structure & organs as we have.

I don't think a silicon neural net with the neurons of a human being would be the same thing after two dozen years of training as a human being after 24.

You're also assuming that there's nothing more to a mind than its neurons.

Re: Artificial Intelligence Generates Christmas Song from Holiday Image

#93

Post by ythn »

logicallee wrote: post #82
ythn wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thousands of years? Who knows how long before the Wright Brothers people have been attempting flight?

ythn, you should start where we had the combustion engine, since it was a source of huge amounts of power (the power density of the fuel) that was already effectively being turned into motion. What I'm saying is that the server farms @ Google, Amazon, and elsewhere, are at the stage of the "combustion engine" -- not just 'powerful enough', but more powerful than necesssary. I base this on a count of the number of neu…

I don't doubt we will be able to do great things with machine learning in the coming years.

What I do doubt is that machine learning will become generic anytime soon. I predict machine learning will always need some degree of specialization - we aren't reaching general intelligence/learning within our lifetimes. A machine that is awesome at playing Go will suck at translating languages.

I also predict machine learning will never be able to surpass humans in terms of creative ability. A top notch machine-written book/poem will always be inferior to a top notch human-written book/poem, for example. Humans can invent new things, machines seem only capable of rehashing existing things. For example, at some point a human writer invented the concept of an unreliable narrator. If you "teach" a machine how to write by feeding it thousands of books, but you exclude books that have unreliable narrators, will the machine ever write a book whose narrator is unreliable? I think not.

I'll happily admit you were right all along if AGI does come about within even the next 20 years, but I think you are grossly oversimplifying things in order to embrace the sci-fi fantasy you wish were real.

Re: Artificial Intelligence Generates Christmas Song from Holiday Image

#94

Post by logicallee »

ythn wrote: post #93
logicallee wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ythn, you should start where we had the combustion engine, since it was a source of huge amounts of power (the power density of the fuel) that was already effectively being turned into motion. What I'm saying is that the server farms @ Google, Amazon, and elsewhere, are at the stage of the "combustion engine" -- not just 'powerful enough', but more powerful than necesssary. I base this on a count of the number of neu…

I don't doubt we will be able to do great things with machine learning in the coming years. What I do doubt is that machine learning will become generic anytime soon. I predict machine learning will always need some degree of specialization - we aren't reaching general intelligence/learning within our lifetimes. A machine that is awesome at playing Go will suck at translating languages. I also predict machine learnin…

I'm curious if this is in spite of you being on board that "sure, server farms do more than enough computation for parity with the human brain" or whether you don't consider neural nets in relation to human neural nets (biological brains)?

If you do consider and admit that computationally there seems to be enough horsepower there, where does your skepticism come from that anybody would figure it out?

Alternatively, did you happen to completely ignore the argument about how much computation the human brain does? (Which isn't that much compared with server farms). I mean on a neural level, using the same neural network topology or an approximation of it, actual neural networks.

I guess I'm perplexed at your skepticism.

Re: Artificial Intelligence Generates Christmas Song from Holiday Image

#95

Post by EGreg »

logicallee wrote: post #83
EGreg wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By your own argument, any program that a single human being can write can also contain only 700MB of source code, including graphics and videos etc, which is obviously not true.

you are right, I went too far. but the size of DNA is a good indication of how complex the high-level wiring and topology of neurons likely is, that is, until that neural net has been been trained at all. it takes years to train a human neural net to even been able to speak (toddlers.) But regarding the architecture, there's good reason to think that the wiring for it is not infinitely complex, taking trillions of te…

I honestly disagree. Because in that case any evolution of anything would be impossible. Take a look at Wolfram's New Kind of Science for an analysis of how massive complexity arises from simple beginnings.

I will go further and tell you thay the state of AI so far is nowhere as advanced as you think. It is not a flexible intelligence that can figure out connections between concepts (look up Cyc for the closest we've got). It's PARAMETRIC MODELS made by HUMANS where a neural net simply runs an algorithm written by HUMANS to optimize something. It's just an optimization problem.

You know where all the ingenuity and progressin machines comes from currently? The ability to make PERFECT COPIES AND SEARCH QUICKLY. You see, learning takes a long time and imperfectly copies information. Books could be copied but search is slow. Now with computers we can try algorithms out and the ones that work better are SELECTED FOR AND COPIED and anyone around the world can contribute. That is also why open source outcompetes closed solutions.

You will find that the huge innovation in technology and software from 40s and 50s til now has all been because HUMANS added to the snowball and replicated good ideas. The ideas themselves require HUMANS to generate new ideas.

Show me one AI today that can form connections between concepts to teach itself to solve arbitrary problems, instead of just optimizing some parametric pattern recognizer.

Re: Artificial Intelligence Generates Christmas Song from Holiday Image

#96

Post by logicallee »

EGreg wrote: post #95
logicallee wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you are right, I went too far. but the size of DNA is a good indication of how complex the high-level wiring and topology of neurons likely is, that is, until that neural net has been been trained at all. it takes years to train a human neural net to even been able to speak (toddlers.) But regarding the architecture, there's good reason to think that the wiring for it is not infinitely complex, taking trillions of te…

I honestly disagree. Because in that case any evolution of anything would be impossible. Take a look at Wolfram's New Kind of Science for an analysis of how massive complexity arises from simple beginnings. I will go further and tell you thay the state of AI so far is nowhere as advanced as you think. It is not a flexible intelligence that can figure out connections between concepts (look up Cyc for the closest we've…

it would be a massive breakthrough if such an AI existed today, and it doesn't.

Due to the amount of hardware that we have to throw at the problem, it may, however, happen at any moment. I am saying we have more than enough hardware for general intelligence to arise out of server farms - but, yes, the millions of years of evolution that gave rise to humans hasn't occurred. it would be a breakthrough, yes.

Re: Artificial Intelligence Generates Christmas Song from Holiday Image

#97

Post by phs318u »

Florin_Andrei wrote: post #68
logicallee wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of five, don't you mean "two to three"? And under that comparison, isn't it scary how much it does sound that way? Like a kid who hears words together but don't know what they mean yet? (and doesn't really get the cultural things around it.) To me it sounds like a quite musical 2-3 year old stringing words together. Doesn't it strike anyone else that way? These things are going to grow up very, very soon! We…

> Instead of five, don't you mean "two to three"? And under that comparison, isn't it scary how much it does sound that way? Like a kid who hears words together but don't know what they mean yet? In a sense, that's expected, and it's a (perhaps weak) indication that we're moving in the right direction. > You're watching a two-year old. It's interesting to think about what it will be like when it's ten, sure. But what…

> Or 23000. Because, you know, it's a machine. Deep Thought[1] instantly came to mind.

[1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/hitchhikers/guide/deepthought.shtm...

Re: Artificial Intelligence Generates Christmas Song from Holiday Image

#98

Post by naasking »

zeveb wrote: post #91
nkozyra wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is not with the statistical but with the parameters around the output and the organization of training data.

I think that your assumption is that the genius of Shakespeare's plays can be statistically reproduced through sufficiently-clever organisation. That is not obviously true to me. Some things are just art, capable of being truly understood only by a creature with a head and heart, arms & legs, love & hate, emotions, experiences ­— in short, a man.

So you're saying humans are not just cleverly organised statistical automata? If so, science would disagree with that position.

Re: Artificial Intelligence Generates Christmas Song from Holiday Image

#99

Post by [deleted] »

zeveb wrote: post #91
nkozyra wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is not with the statistical but with the parameters around the output and the organization of training data.

I think that your assumption is that the genius of Shakespeare's plays can be statistically reproduced through sufficiently-clever organisation. That is not obviously true to me. Some things are just art, capable of being truly understood only by a creature with a head and heart, arms & legs, love & hate, emotions, experiences ­— in short, a man.

[deleted]

Re: Artificial Intelligence Generates Christmas Song from Holiday Image

#100

Post by oh_sigh »

d33 wrote: post #24
logicallee wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of five, don't you mean "two to three"? And under that comparison, isn't it scary how much it does sound that way? Like a kid who hears words together but don't know what they mean yet? (and doesn't really get the cultural things around it.) To me it sounds like a quite musical 2-3 year old stringing words together. Doesn't it strike anyone else that way? These things are going to grow up very, very soon! We…

> the entire source code for the human brain has to be strictly less than 700 MB, because the fully sequenced human genome which obviously encodes the full human mind is less than 700 MB uncompressed Actually those 700MB are compressed, in a way so sophisticated that we don't really know how to uncompress it yet - or whether it's even possible without the external resources our planet provides. And keep in mind that…

Imagine a very compact, compressed representation of the most complicated CPU on the planet. How many MB do you think that would be?
Post reply on HN