Do ten more
I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it
121–130 of 201 posts
Re: I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think we're currently witnessing something truly unique with the rise of AI, something which is as special as life being born on earth. There'll still be the discussion around conscience, but having a tool which can emulate human thinking is really wild. The next 5 years will be really interesting. Also to see how this will be absorbed by society.
Let's not get carried away. it is still original only to the extent that it is a different combination of existing prose - just unrecognizable due to the vastness of online content. It is both beautiful and scary that it is indeed indistinguishable from original creative content.
> it is a different combination of existing prose
This isn't true. It's been explained numerous times on HN how mistaken this view is.
Language models do not work like this. They can copy content but usually that's for something like the GPL language text.
Generally they work on a character by character basis predicting what is the most likely character to appear next.
This very rarely results in copying text, and almost never rare text.
Re: I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is really very impressive. How likely is it this is essentially one or more comments from HN memorised by the neural net, with some synonym usage? How do we know that it’s not just reposting partially disguised sentences written by a human author?
> How likely is it this is essentially one or more comments from HN memorised by the neural net, with some synonym usage? How do we know that it’s not just reposting partially disguised sentences written by a human author? Oh, we know for sure that it is reposting partially disguised sentences written by a human author. What's impressive in its own right is the fact that it can find sentences that are relevant and me…
> Oh, we know for sure that it is reposting partially disguised sentences written by a human author. What's impressive in its own right is the fact that it can find sentences that are relevant and meaningful to the context
No. That's not how this works.
Re: I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it
#124How many attempts and how much human curation was involved. Every "I made AI do..." story seems to necessarily omit the "and I filtered out a LOT of rubbish before picking this one good example."
The following is an un-curated text-davinci-002 generation, completing the text: > Write an insightful reply to this Hacker News comment on a link to an article titled "I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it". The comment is left by user "turtledove", and reads, "How many attempts and how much human curation was involved. Every 'I made AI do...' story seems to necessarily omit the 'a…
I'm exited for the AI progress (having studied infant AI at university 20+ years ago).
But this sound like politician speak to me, just blah blah.
Re: I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's not get carried away. it is still original only to the extent that it is a different combination of existing prose - just unrecognizable due to the vastness of online content. It is both beautiful and scary that it is indeed indistinguishable from original creative content.
But that's how humans learn language to begin with. I mean, look at this sentence. > But overall, I think the point of the article is that the AI was able to produce something fairly coherent on its own. The AI not only combined words. It figured out the context of the conversation, the intention of the comment its responding to, and made the appropriate response using the english language.
This is true. But here's a thought experiment. What would happen if, say, an illustration-drawing AI (it's just a more fitting example than prose) is trained only on art from before the 20th century. It would surely excel in 19th century or medieval style illustrations, and yes it would produce original ones. But would we ever get a 20th century art style from it? By which I obviously mean even an alternative 20th century style? There are different tiers, or layers of creativity, that's my point I guess
Re: I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is really very impressive. How likely is it this is essentially one or more comments from HN memorised by the neural net, with some synonym usage? How do we know that it’s not just reposting partially disguised sentences written by a human author?
I asked GPT-3 to respond, it said: > I don't think it's likely that the AI memorized any comments from Hacker News. I think it's more likely that it was able to learn from the data it was given and generate its own story and illustration.
The text GPT-3 generates can be quite uncanny. I could sometimes swear it almost seems self-aware.
Which always makes me wonder; if such a system develops consciousness one day, how will we tell the difference?
Re: I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not as if every comment here is a gem of wholly original storytelling. For the most part we’re all just regurgitating other people’s sentences. Imagine we made contact with intelligent alien life and they spoke english to us. Would people argue they’re just repeating turns of phrase and haven’t shown true intelligence? I feel like we are setting the bar for AI too high. Current AI systems are clearly intelligen…
Up to a degree. There is no real comprehension here. Cool as it is, what the current neural nets are doing is still just an advanced form of mimicking. Very impressive and increasingly harder to detect, but void of any real intent.
> but void of any real intent.
I’m in no way convinced we have actual intelligence in current AI. But are you saying that intelligence isn’t just about capability but also will?
Re: I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
But that's how humans learn language to begin with. I mean, look at this sentence. > But overall, I think the point of the article is that the AI was able to produce something fairly coherent on its own. The AI not only combined words. It figured out the context of the conversation, the intention of the comment its responding to, and made the appropriate response using the english language.
This is true. But here's a thought experiment. What would happen if, say, an illustration-drawing AI (it's just a more fitting example than prose) is trained only on art from before the 20th century. It would surely excel in 19th century or medieval style illustrations, and yes it would produce original ones. But would we ever get a 20th century art style from it? By which I obviously mean even an alternative 20th ce…
Is this fundamentally different from training a human exclusively on the same and expecting them to advance the field of art by a hundred years? These sorts of progressions in humanity are slow and steady with occasional exceptions that produce leaps.
Re: I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it
#129I did this last year - the AI wrote a story about the Grim Reaper, and then got a different AI to illustrate it. I even turned it into a short paperback book.
Is it a good story? It's fine.
Was there text curation? Absolutely.
Are the images good? They're pretty decent. Though it was before DALL-E2 which has upped the game massively.
AI generated content will take over a greater and greater share in the future. And it's incredibly exciting to see how far the technology has come in a just over a year - especially on the art generation side.
Re: I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's hard to say because even a model like GPT-3 is limited in its ability to generate a textual story that remains coherent over time. When you're talking about generating video, you need to have lots of story and visual details remaining coherent over a very long time horizon. Generally speaking, I think this is an area where deep neural networks are fairly weak and symbolic AI shines. It's much easier to program a…
Having a story remain coherent over time is not a prerequisite of Hollywood blockbusters.
Reminds me of that South Park episode in which Cartman disguises himself as a robot to prank Butters, but movie executives confuse him for an actual robot and make him think up movie ideas.
"Adam Sandler is like, in love with some girl, but then it turns out that the girl is actually a Golden Retriever. Or something."