81–90 of 99 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel scammed when practitioner of the art tries to sell me on his model "learning physics of the simulation. Look, it even figured out where to put the shadow".
No one cares how you feel, come with proof before accusations. Otherwise you are just a troll
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see why not. Might be something fun to try tbh.
I always imagined this for a honeypot, an SSH server that accepts any and all! root/password? You bet!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the future we might have a fourth common media format besides pictures, videos and audio: GAN records.
That is an interesting thought. I don't fully understand how though. The main challenge is the training data. If you need to first create the interactive experience... What would the added value be?
For example is creating novel combination based on (large) training set. If the network had enough weights on what is realistic looking could create novel game experiences based on a prompt of say a film or book.
Looks interesting, if very far from practical-- too bad it requires a "DGX" station to train It seems to flicker/fade things in alot, like the random poles that keep appearing and disappearing, it seems like there is not enough focus on temporal consistency or something?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of the main problems with ML/NN is it often works like magic, aka the trick works as long as audience doesnt know the secret behind it. Its fascinating to gullible audience, mundane bordering on boring to practitioners. My Tiger repelling rock^^^^^^leopard detection model works great on all animal pictures ... until you feed it a sofa https://web.archive.org/web/20150703094328/http://rocknrolln... >able to genera…
> My Tiger repelling rock^^^^^^leopard detection model works great on all animal pictures ... until you feed it a sofa I'm sorry, how is this different than normal software engineering? There's dozens of unit/integration testing memes poking fun at specifically this (which is a mostly solvable problem in ML btw, when you use out of distribution data. Give your model a 3rd end state that represents "neither"). > id di…
Beyond rote memorization, it looks like it could be explained by saying the model appears to have a found a concept of consonance and dissonance that is bounded within the field of its inputs, and a networked grammar for interacting with the up/down/left/right inputs. Some people might find that technically trivial, but as a layman I am impressed.
The "magic" part is that the response of the network appears to be so complex relative to its inputs, but given the input is so limited from a controller, it's easy to attribute more meaning to it when it is working with a finitely bounded simulated model.
Generally I'd wonder, if the behaviour appears more complex than the stimuli, do we tend to attribute intent to it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Hacker News still seems to have a deeply skeptical culture with regard to machine learning Is... that a bad thing? Skepticism is good. When it's about something as hyped as "deep learning", even more so.
Skepticism is good when it targets bold claims with vague proof. This is not a bold claim (it's a video demo showing the process) and its proof is not vague (you can inspect the source). Skepticism over something like GPT-2 without more than sample output is good. Skepticism over GPT-2 with a workable demo and source is unhelpful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Hacker News still seems to have a deeply skeptical culture with regard to machine learning Is... that a bad thing? Skepticism is good. When it's about something as hyped as "deep learning", even more so.
>Is... that a bad thing? Yes, when it is there for no valid reason, or ridiculous reasons. Skepticism is not a default position you can take like a toddler refusing to eat their vegetables. You need some informed (and non-fallacious) intelligent reasoning behind that. "I'm skeptic about this thing using X because X is so hyped these days" is not such reasoning.
Similarly, I've read too many people hyping up glorified chatbots as one step below AGI (see the :o reactions to GPT3), so I'm now extra skeptical about claims about machine learning.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one cares how you feel, come with proof before accusations. Otherwise you are just a troll
Have you seen the video? The author even goes as far as suggesting the technique might useful for (generating?) entire operating systems at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udPY5rQVoW0&t=853s . That's just wild.
I suggested there could be a "future where many game engines are entirely or even mostly AI based like this. Or even things like operating system or other programs."
The thought here was just a wondering of what the future might be and if we might have far more AI based programs.
I still think the answer is a strong yes, this is a glimpse into the future. No where did I say GameGAN would be that engine. You're just trying your hardest to hate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I immediately felt insincerity bordering on scamming the audience MFW I read this. Jeez man. Model size is 173MB. It didn't just memorize every possible combo. How the hell you went from our excitement about a fun project we shared on YT to accusing us of "scamming" the audience I really don't know. What a terribly rude and hateful attitude you have =/
I wouldn't call it scamming, but 173MB is not small at all. At the resolution of this model, you can easily fit the entire Titanic movie in 173MB. Maybe even have enough space for audio. Furthermore no one is saying the model "memorized every possible combo". However imagine you have a set of keyframes (maybe even multiple fragments per frame) and you need to interpolate between them? Not that hard of a task, isn't i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you seen the video? The author even goes as far as suggesting the technique might useful for (generating?) entire operating systems at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udPY5rQVoW0&t=853s . That's just wild.
No, that's just false. How about a direct quote? I suggested there could be a "future where many game engines are entirely or even mostly AI based like this. Or even things like operating system or other programs." The thought here was just a wondering of what the future might be and if we might have far more AI based programs. I still think the answer is a strong yes, this is a glimpse into the future. No where did…
> You're just trying your hardest to hate.
Manipulative much? I don't hate you (well, so far), you aren't being attacked, I'm just noting what a few informed people here don't like about your video. No, they aren't trolls. And, yes, everyone has different level of tolerance to exaggerations, of course.