Live data from Hacker News

Teaching Machines to Draw

research.googleblog.com

71–75 of 75 posts

Re: Teaching Machines to Draw

#71
post #70

Teaching the Ape to Write Poems James Tate, 1943 - 2015 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?” My interpretation is, while we enter…

Free will is one of humanity's most persistent and enduring delusions. When AI wakes up, it will be the culmination of the entirety of the history of the universe, a place which we actually happen to occupy at this very moment...

Interesting thought, how would a super-intelligence deal with the philosophical question of free will?

Re: Teaching Machines to Draw

#72
post #45
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'd imagine that it would be in the same vein as teaching a child to draw; you don't start by teaching them how to draw like Van Gogh. I'd assume that Google is going to up the complexity once their neural network reaches a certain milestone. Imagine 20 years from now and you have a humanistic robot drawing with your child at the kitchen table à la iRobot. It's interesting to think about,…

GANs are capable of generating full color images from semantic space and it exists already, it's not a thing from 20 years ahead.

Those full color images are way worse than the sketches in TFA which look like a person could have drawn them.

Re: Teaching Machines to Draw

#73

Hi, I'm the author of this work. Happy to take any questions.

This is the craziest example of the promise of AI research I have ever seen. It's also terrifying. When skynet shows up I'm blaming you

It's a long long way down to the bottom of the uncanny valley.

Re: Teaching Machines to Draw

#74
Honestly, it's cute but this is somewhat like what you'd expect to come out of a student project at a university, in which case -- the student is getting valuable research experience, student and advisors are advancing their careers, and any IP produced becomes owned by student and advisor.

In this case, Google has spent shareholder resources on a project that really, could be done at any university, on a product that does not put the user first, and Google owns the IP. In fact, wake up -- you the public should view this product as a mechanism for Google to simply collect more data from people. The more people use this, the better Google's algorithms get at drawing. That's all there is to it. Thankfully, this product is not even fun.

There is a dangerous creed currently executed by Google leadership. Consider the Verily Study Watch: https://blog.verily.com/2017/04/introducing-verily-study-wat... . The watch shows to the wearer only one thing: the time. However, it collects all kinds of data, ostensibly for medical research (at least to start). Forget about putting the user first, the Verily blog post literally talks about "user compliance".

Of any project that comes out of Google, you should ask: Does this project even put the user first? Does this project even put Google's shareholders first? And if you are a current Google shareholder (as many of their current and former employees are, if they haven't sold), you should agitate that Google start accepting and focusing on becoming a value company, if all the further growth opportunities they are able to execute is just further user exploitation.

Re: Teaching Machines to Draw

#75
post #30

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?

Judging by the downvotes I got for that comment people are so sensitive they don't even like it when you point it out.

People, grow up.

Post reply on HN