61–70 of 75 posts
http://www.aaronshome.com/aaron/aaron/index.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARON
Pamela McCorduck's book about Cohen's work, Aaron's Code, is also a good read.
How is that not the title of the blog post?
I've read through all comments and referred docs, but no one seemed to offer much reason why we'd want machines to draw sketches. An incomplete list: * It's a different way to represent drawings. Alternative to pixels * Perhaps making it easier to render old-school animation at one point? It's a fun rabbit hole though, the many sub-perfect bicycle sketches reminded me to this project, when someone created 3D renders…
This is a scary milestone on the road to general intelligence. In this case understanding abstract concepts. When machines learn something - they start being able to replicate it perfectly across as many machines as they want, parallelize it and execute it without mistakes more times than humans have ever done in history. So that means - a nearly infinite glut of amazing art, jokes, music and movies. And not just tha…
Hi, I'm the author of this work. Happy to take any questions.
It seems that you use children development stages as inspiration for AI development. Can you explicit your approach? You can also see my question as a rebuttal to the "it is useless" argument.
I was also fascinated at trying to understand how we are able to translate a vague concept in our minds, into a sequence of motor actors that doodles out this concept onto a piece of paper. We also take into account some feedback information during the doodling process. For example, I compare what I already doodled with what I actually want to draw, and decide I'll doodle next based on this information.
So we thought one way to study this ability of going from concept -> sketch, is to construct a very simple model of this doodling process, and try to train the model to doodle. We model this "vague concept" as a vector of floating point numbers. To model this "vagueness", we add noise to this vector. This way the model must learn to work with noisy concepts. The model takes this floating point vector as an input and (randomly) samples an output sequence of simple motor actions that doodles out an object. The sampling process is random (the model's outputs are the parameters of a pdf at each timestep), so the model can produce many different outputs given the same input. During the sampling process, the model feeds back into its input what it has just drawn, and process this information to decide what to draw next.
We show that our simplified model of the doodling process is also able to go from concept -> sketch, and also from sketch -> concept, and show that the concepts can be augmented, to alter the sketch the model produces in a meaningful way. We tried to make this model simple and robust enough so that in the future, we can incorporate it into more complicated models that try to do more than just doodling a simple object.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you kidding. No one is saying this should replace art. It's just an experiment in generative algorithms. It can though have interesting applications in assisted design, which I bet you would say is not art either anyways.
No, but I'm used to people not understanding me until much later.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you kidding. No one is saying this should replace art. It's just an experiment in generative algorithms. It can though have interesting applications in assisted design, which I bet you would say is not art either anyways.
No, but I'm used to people not understanding me until much later.
Everyone I know who tried it drew a somewhat small repertoire of naughty sketches. Yet the service militantly refuses to recognize even the most basic of naughty sketches. :)
I heard about that I and I want an answer on it. Why is one subject deemed off-limits?
Google would prefer not to risk losing a shedload of money just so that their sketch-processing neural network can amuse people by correctly recognizing penises.
It's just this one subject because few others get people so upset.
(And contemplating others that might suggests that actually it's not strictly just this one subject. False positives for "decapitated corpse" or "big pile of excrement", say, might be just as problematic. Want to guess whether the system is good at recognizing decapitated corpses and piles of excrement?)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I heard about that I and I want an answer on it. Why is one subject deemed off-limits?
Because if it were able to recognize dick-pics, or whatever other manifestation of that "one subject" you might have in mind, then it would sometimes recognize them wrongly and respond to a picture of a toothbrush as if it were a picture of a penis. If the person who drew the toothbrush were of a sensitive disposition, they might get Very Upset at this and make a big fuss. Public attitudes to that One Subject being w…
I know this is just an experiment right now but I want to put sex/nudity on the table as a subject of debate because it is central to artistic endeavor because arbitrary standards can become almost universal and institutionalized through path dependence (such as the QWERTY keyboard you are probably using right now). Imagine a not-too-distant future with a Magic Brush that easily allows you to paint the colors and shapes of your choice with the aid of some technological wizardry, but prevents the creation of nude or sexualized figures. That would not be a healthy development.
Oh my God. This is the first time I've seen anything related to AI research that's given me a visceral reaction of terror. This is more than just making pretty pictures, the machine understands cats and pigs in a human way. It knows how many legs and eyes they're supposed to have, and where they go. And this isn't some human made algorithm, it learned that on its own. The language of the paper even implies that the r…
I love DL but on the topic of visceral reactions of terror (or fear) to AI research, for me it was the recognition of the hot research on facial recognition(age, gender, ethnicity) with CNN's. Immediately, I had this vision of a dystopian future (informed by WW2) where some dictatorship had cameras that looked for people of a particular ethnicity and alerted soldiers of the targets position.
They didn’t have much trouble
teaching the ape to write poems:
first they strapped him into the chair,
then tied the pencil around his hand
(the paper had already been nailed down).
Then Dr. Bluespire leaned over his shoulder
and whispered into his ear:
“You look like a god sitting there.
Why don’t you try writing something?”
We look like gods sitting here.