41–50 of 342 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Put another way, over time people devalue things which can be produced with minimal human effort. I suspect it's less about humanity's values, and more about the way money closely tracks "time" (specifically the duration of human effort).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And then suddenly this is not something that fascinates people anymore… in 10 years as non-synthetic becomes the new bio or artisan or whatever you like. Humanity has its ways of objecting accelerationism.
Put another way, over time people devalue things which can be produced with minimal human effort. I suspect it's less about humanity's values, and more about the way money closely tracks "time" (specifically the duration of human effort).
When did you ask people for directions, or other major questions, instead of Google?
You can wax poetic about wanting "the human touch", but at the end of the day, the market speaks -- people will just prefer everything automated. Including their partners, after your boyfriend can remember every little detail about you, notice everything including your pupils dilating, know exactly how you like it, when you like it, never get angry unless it's to spice things up, and has been trained on 1000 other partners, how could you go back? When robots can raise children better than parents, with patience and discipline and teaching them with individual attention, know 1000 ways to mold their behavior and achieve healthier outcomes. Everything people do is being commodified as we speak. Soon it will be humor, entertainment, nursing, etc. Then personal relations.
Just extrapolate a decade or three into the future. Best case scenario: if we nail alignment, we build a zoo for ourselves where we have zero power and are treated like animals who have sex and eat and fart all day long. No one will care about whatever you have to offer, because everyone will be surrounded by layers of bots from the time they are born.
PS: anything you write on HN can already have been written by AI, pretty soon you may as well quit producing any content at all. No one will care whether you wrote it.
Judging by how they've been trying to ram AI into YouTube creators workflows I suppose it's only a matter of time before they try to automate the entire pipeline from idea, to execution, to "engaging" with viewers. It won't be good at doing any of that but when did that ever stop them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26QHXElgrl8 https://x.com/surri01/status/1867433782992879617
> Judging by how they've been trying to ram AI into YouTube creators workflows […] Thanks for sharing that video and post! One way to think about this stuff is to imagine that you are 14 and starting to create videos, art, music, etc in order to build a platform online. Maybe you dream of having 7 channels at the same time for your sundry hobbies and building audiences. For that 14 year old, these tools are available…
If this is "just another tool" then my question is: does the output of someone who has used this tool for one thousand hours display a meaningful difference in quality to someone who just picked it up?
I have not seen any evidence that it does.
Another idea: What the pro generative AI crowd doesn't seem to understand is that good art is not about _execution_ it's about _making deliberate choices_. While a master painter or guitarist may indeed pull off incredible technical feats, their execution is not the art in and of itself, it is widening the amount of choices they can make. The more and more generative AI steps into the role of making these choices ironically the more useless it becomes.
And lastly: I've never met anyone who has spent significant time creating art react to generative AI as anything more than a toy.
Some of the videos look incredibly believable though.
The example of a "Renaissance palace chamber" is very historically inaccurate by around a century or two, the generated video looks a lot like a pastiche of Versailles from the Age en Enlightenment instead. I guess that's what you get by training on the internet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They basically already have this: https://workspace.google.com/products/vids/
Last week I started seeing a banner in Google Docs along the lines of "Create a video based on the content of this doc!" with a call to action that brought me to Google Vids.
Seriously, it sounds like something kids can have fun with, or bored deskworkers. But a serious use case, at the current state of the art? I doubt it.
Like the tanker which is still steering to fully align with the course people expect it to be, which they don't recognize that it will soon be there and be capable of rolling over everything which comes in its way.
If OpenAi claims they're close to having AGI, Google most likely already has it and is doing its shenanigans with the US government under the radar. While Microsoft are playing the cool guys and Amazon is still trying to get their act together.
I appreciate they posted the skateboarding video. Wildly unrealistic whenever he performs a trick - just morphing body parts. Some of the videos look incredibly believable though.
Maybe it’s just me who couldn’t find it, (the website barely works at all on FF iOS)..