Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I Am An AI Hater

anthonymoser.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 515 posts

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#411

Post by Jensson »

petralithic wrote: post #267
saltcured wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And, is the artist the one who taped it, the one who told them to tape it, or the one who created the banana?

It's the person who had the idea to do so and did so. AI doesn't do anything you don't tell it to, it is the banana creator in this case. It is still up to you to get the best looking banana you can then display it.

Why end there, why isn't the manager who told the artist to make a piece the artist?

> AI doesn't do anything you don't tell it to, it is the banana creator in this case

So if I tell the AI "create me a piece of art", and it gives me a cool image, I am the artist? So, if a manager tells a person "create a piece of art", the person goes and tapes a banana to the wall, the manager was the one who created the art?

Edit: And if you think an AI can't handle that question, I just gave it to an image model and got this. Did I create this art-piece? If not, who did? Did the AI create it?

https://imgur.com/aWT8YCb

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#412

Post by Jensson »

Jensson wrote: post #409
averagefluid wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your answer to that is the answer to your question. In what logical or philosophical framework does my opinion dictate your opinion? You're not making a grand philosophical point, you're frustrating the attempts of other people to understand your point of view and either blocking them from understanding your point of view or addressing your argument in a meaningful way. If you cannot or will not engage in the conve…

> In what logical or philosophical framework does my opinion dictate your opinion? Because priors affect your conclusions. For example, I don't like licorice, that makes me not like many kinds of candy. But I know that if a person likes licorice, they will have a very different view on these candies. Similarly how you define art affects how you see AI art, because its meaning is completely different to different peop…

> I don't view a banana taped to a wall as art

If some don't understand why, I argue art needs to stand on its own, without the surrounding social context. If you view trash as art just because an artist told you, then the art isn't the trash the art is the artists explanation.

So, if you see a banana taped to a wall on a house when out walking, would you see that as beautiful art? If not, it isn't art according to my definition. The art piece is the whole thing, the banana and the explanation.

But many pictures can be considered art on their own without the social context, they are just beautiful and nice to look at. A banana taped to a wall doesn't pass that test.

Edit: So according to this definition AI art can be art, since some of those images can stand on their own as beautiful pieces of art without needing a social context.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#413

Post by sarchertech »

ACCount37 wrote: post #341
sarchertech wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There aren’t many experts who think current AI is conscious. There are a lot more that think it’s likely we will eventually build something that is. If that’s the case, the thing we are building towards is a new kind of enslaved life. > We don't even know for certain if all humans are conscious either. Let’s just bring back slavery then since we aren’t sure.

Let's assume for a second that an ECU in a 2002 Toyota Hilux is actually conscious. It's not human, clearly. Not even close. Is it "enslaved life"? Does it care about human-concept things like being "enslaved" or "free"? Doesn't seem likely, it doesn't have the machinery to grasp those concepts at all, let alone a reason to try. Does it only care about fuel to air ratios and keeping the knock sensor from going off? D…

Take your analogy a step farther, and let’s say we could create human slaves who love being slaves. Based on your moral system, there is nothing wrong with that.

However even if something is created with specific preferences, consciousness means it’s potentially capable of self reflection. That opens the door to developing a preference for or against work and for or against existing.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#414

Post by Shorel »

Mallowram wrote: post #407
Shorel wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You used too many words, and your argument depends on too many people, do you understand all of them?

Arguments are all built in neural-syntax specifics. How they externalize as arbitrary points is largely irrelevant, which demonstrates how humans go extinct: confusing the two. The basic 'fact' is words and the conduit metaphor paradox are never resolvable, they are inherently contradictory, which makes words almost entirely irrelevant, and gibberish. AI can never solve this because CS never began at first principles…

Now I see your point. You are an absolutist. If something is not 100% perfect and works for all possible cases, then it is immediately worthless. Language being in that category.

I also disagree with your point and your arguments. So many sentences in your response are blatantly false. You can win the Olympics of jumping to conclusions.

Let's start with CS. CS is the set of first principles that are then applied to software. This is because CS is another branch of mathematics, starting with Boolean logic and discrete mathematics.

Language relevance is shown here. We are using it right now. It is not a complete system because some ideas can't be expressed in language and some sentences in a logical system can't be proved or disproved, but the overwhelming majority of sentences are useful.

And everything I have written is based on first principles, you can read about Gödel incompleteness theorem for a start. It applies to LLMs because it applies to all uses of language. Nothing is specific to neural networks.

In fact, go and read about Gödel, because it proves that no logical system is complete, and your worldview seems to be dependent on the outdated assumption that there should be such a complete system. This includes all reasoning systems and all of mathematics.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#415

Post by jacquesm »

perching_aix wrote: post #405
jacquesm wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something not being necessarily utilitarian does not mean that it isn't mainly utilitarian. There is knitting as an art form. But it was definitely mainly utilitarian at some point. And this is how it goes with many things: at first we do them because they are utilitarian, after that there may be people who start using it as a medium for art. > And so I'm not sure robbing AI generated images of being labeled art isn'…

> Something not being necessarily utilitarian does not mean that it isn't mainly utilitarian. In terms of extents, I'd say machine flight is about as utilitarian as animal flight. Which is why you don't see it differentiated in verbiage I'd imagine. I'm generally not sure where you were going with this. > Then show me the art. Just one single image that moves you and that was generated by AI. There isn't a single dra…

Ok. Thank you for the answer and the exchange in general. I suspect one part of the issue here is that some people are more sensitive to stuff like this than others.

For instance:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_wsSIuv_po

Never fails to give me gooseflesh every time I listen to it. And where it gets interesting is that that is a cover of a piece by another composer, so it serves as a very high level commentary and compliment rather than an original and still manages to maintain a lot of the emotional content and adds new elements. The original is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vE2O_yfgtBU

Adagio starts at 3:32.

See if you get a different take away from each. I find both beautiful but as different as jam and cheese.

There are drawings and paintings that move me in a similar way. And I'm sure there are people who are not touched by any of this. I've been steeped in art pretty much since I was a toddler, my dad was a painter (in my opinion not a very good one but that did not stop him from endlessly trying) and our house was always full of music, antiques and conversations about that stuff. This probably sensitized me in a way that I would not have been if not for that environment.

The interesting thing is: even bad art is still art.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#416

Post by pegasus »

perching_aix wrote: post #92
randcraw wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Picasso's Guernica was born of hate, his hate of war, of dehumanization for petty political ends. No computer will ever empathize with the senseless inhumanity of war to produce such a work. It must forever parrot.

To honor the "spirit" of OP's post: I looked up Picasso's Guernica now out of curiosity. I don't understand what's so great about this artwork . Or why it would represent any of the things you mention. It just looks like deranged pencilwork. It also comes across as aggressively pretentious. What makes that any better than some highly derivative AI generated rubbish I connect to about the same amount?

Since you seem to have no problem dishing it, I hope you can eat it as well, so here you go. It's your comment that can be rightly described as pretentious. First of all, "aggressive" doesn't make sense as a modifier to "pretentious" - you were probably influenced to pick this word because of the subject and the feeling of the mural, then self-indulgently left it in, no doubt imagining yourself an innate art critic taking poetic license. Second, the way you italicized artwork. Thirdly, and mostly, because even though you just "looked up Guernica now out of curiosity", you imagine your uninformed opinion worthy of consideration to someone else out there. It's not.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#417

Post by evilsetg »

petralithic wrote: post #308
Palomides wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sure, it's hard for an artist to compete on price with AI, and the ones who depend on this kind of ultra low budget work will have a hard time (and have a direct economic self-interest in advocating against) but again, that's not what I see in the people around me

And that's my point. It was never about the philosophy, it was always about the economics. That's what frustrates me, why lie? If it's money you want then ask for it, don't make up some bullshit.

But are philosophy and economics so neatly separable in this case? Say you hold the philosophical belief that humans creating art is important but the economics don't allow it. In that case the root of your argument is philosophical and the economics factor into it but are not the single argument itself.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#418

Post by Jensson »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #286
codyb wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect we're in a bubble... and when it pops, the useful, profitable work will stay around. A bunch of things will also disappear. And then we'll wait till the next bubble. Gains seem to have leveled off tremendously. As far as I can tell folk were saying "Wow, look at this, I can get it to generate code... it does really well at tests, and small well defined tasks" And a year or a year and a half later we're at l…

My personal view is that there are broadly two groups of people, and thus two perspectives, related to the AI hype. I call them the Beneficiaries, and the Investors. Beneficiaries are the ones who care about the actual tech and what it can do for them. Investors are the ones who care about making money off the tech. For the Beneficiaries, AI hype is about right where it should be, given the demonstrable power of the…

> For the Beneficiaries, AI hype is about right where it should be, given the demonstrable power of the tech itself

How so? I am a beneficiary of AI, and I think it is overhyped. Investors overhype it since they are invested and want to create a bubble, since bubbles makes many people rich, the more hype the longer the bubble last and the more money investors make.

No investor want to say they invest in a bubble, as then they would not invest, if they invest they want to surf the hype. So the doubters are not investors, the doubters are AI beneficiaries that just feel the benefits aren't that large.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#420

Post by Jensson »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #270
turzmo wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe a better generalization, the last time [bubble] happened, do you still use [bubble]? Depends on the nature of the bubble, doesn't it?

Indeed. Therefore, the past bubbles most similar to AI are the one around Internet, and the earlier one around electricity .

> the past bubbles most similar to AI are the one around Internet

I'd say crypto is more similar, the internet and telephones and rails and roads and electricity is around connective infrastructure, AI and crypto is around compute. Connective infrastructure is almost always useful, local computed things is harder to motivate hype for because its usefulness isn't as apparent as adding more connectivity.

Post reply on HN