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

Not by AI

notbyai.fyi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 456 posts

Re: Not by AI

#431

Post by dinkumthinkum »

screamingninja wrote: post #214
alfor wrote: post #208

We will soon have to accept that we are not special. We are meat based, the new minds are silicon based. They have different strengths and limitations than us, will surpass us in all cognitive abilities soon. Our hardware evolved to help us survive and reproduce but the evolution is a slow process compared to the intelligent design we do. AI will surpass us and build itself beyond what we can reason about. We will do…

The acceptance of the fact is inevitable that humans are not special as the new minds, which are silicon-based, will soon surpass us in all cognitive abilities due to their different strengths and limitations. The evolution of our hardware is a slow process, while intelligent design leads to the rapid advancement of AI. AI will become so advanced that it will surpass our comprehension, and humans will continue to do…

Is this some kind of cult mantra?

Re: Not by AI

#432

Post by dinkumthinkum »

donatj wrote: post #238
dinkumthinkum wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So Ramanujan with no formal training in mathematics was really surrounded by advanced education of mathematics and had no original ideas? I feel if more people studied philosophy they may discover how problematic these reductions are.

Math isn't a human invention at all. It's the discovery of the nature of the universe and an expression of the world around us.

What does that even mean? Mathematical ideas are ideas. The notion of continued fractions is not just an expression of the world around us. This is basically hokum. The point is that human intelligence utilized original thoughts in the case of Ramanujan.

Re: Not by AI

#433

Post by famouswaffles »

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #430
jeffbee wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not effectively in my experience. Even if I ask it for a discursive treatment in the style of William F. Buckley I always seem to get what reads like a transcript of Entertainment Tonight.

Shhh you can’t point out of the obvious false premises of the cult ….

Lol what ? No shit it can't reliably reproduce every person to grace the earth. Fact is that you can significantly alter the tone and style of the content if you describe what you're looking for. There are other ways to do that without inserting a name. Telling me it failed to reproduce insert random person means absolutely nothing lol.

Re: Not by AI

#434

Post by famouswaffles »

jeffbee wrote: post #403
famouswaffles wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't have a default voice not a definite one. Output can be easily adjusted to sound like whatever

Not effectively in my experience. Even if I ask it for a discursive treatment in the style of William F. Buckley I always seem to get what reads like a transcript of Entertainment Tonight.

First of all, GPT-4 is better.

2nd of all. I don't expect GPT to be able to reliably replicate the style of every person under the sun and neither should you. If you want a different tone, style etc describe the tone or style(flowery etc). Some people it can emulate very well, others it can't. That would be the case, human or not.

Re: Not by AI

#435

Post by satvikpendem »

gspencley wrote: post #50
underyx wrote: post #17

> If humans rely solely on AI to generate content moving forward, any new content generated by AI may just be recycled content from the past. To be honest, I’d struggle to find any human content that is not recycled from the past. I guess we are still better than AI at remixing sufficiently novel combinations of concepts but I think much of this AI content aversion comes from some kind of phobia, or an unwillingness…

Philosophical food for thought: if all content is recycled / mixed from the past, when did innovation and creativity stop? In other words, if there is truly no such thing as an "original idea", then how did the ideas that we are pulling from, deriving from and combining come into existence? If all we are saying is that existing ideas inspire new ones, or that most human generated content is derivative, then I complet…

> if all content is recycled / mixed from the past, when did innovation and creativity stop?

Your question contains the answer. Remixing begets innovation / creativity begets remixing.

Re: Not by AI

#437

Post by nemo44x »

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #428
nemo44x wrote: post #99

"Made in America" vibes. It must be better because we made it... There's a sort of insecurity about this. And I get it, people are freaking out. I feel unsettled in many ways and I truly believe this technology is profound. Wait until it's realtime and embedded in everything. But I don't believe it's a cause for concern. I don't think we need to legislate transformers trained on public data as something illegal, for…

I think iou we missing the point of the “made in America” thing but it’s ok. It’s not surprising.

Was/is a way to differentiate a product from foreign (at a time Japan, now China) made products. That because it was made here (if you’re American which I assume readers here are and if not then are European and are aware of American culture because they imitate it daily) it is better and if not then at least supporting “your kind”.

So made by human or w/e is a similar concept.

Re: Not by AI

#438

Post by barrysteve »

underyx wrote: post #17

> If humans rely solely on AI to generate content moving forward, any new content generated by AI may just be recycled content from the past. To be honest, I’d struggle to find any human content that is not recycled from the past. I guess we are still better than AI at remixing sufficiently novel combinations of concepts but I think much of this AI content aversion comes from some kind of phobia, or an unwillingness…

A lightbulb is clearly a new invention when all you have are oil lamps.

You can retrospectively say we've always had a device that creates light from heat, like this 'new' lightbulb and metaphysically you'd be correct.

But the properties and design of a lightbulb are different to an oil lamp. That's new enough to be called original and Thomas Edison (and whoever else helped him) are the originators of the lightbulb design and they made it real.

An original thought? Probably not, an original object, yes. Very much so.

Re: Not by AI

#439

Post by donatj »

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #432
donatj wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Math isn't a human invention at all. It's the discovery of the nature of the universe and an expression of the world around us.

What does that even mean? Mathematical ideas are ideas. The notion of continued fractions is not just an expression of the world around us. This is basically hokum. The point is that human intelligence utilized original thoughts in the case of Ramanujan.

One of your three sheep is black. 1/3 - that's a fraction, a idealized representation of the real world. Now you take that concept and do it again over and over ad infinitum.

That's not a magical invention that has no bearing on the world around us. That's just an expression of real world taken to its logical conclusion. It was not invented from a vacuum, it was invented from the input of the world around us.

What is "hokum" is the idea that the human mind would somehow come up with meaningful output without meaningful input to seed it.

Re: Not by AI

#440

Post by cmoski »

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #417
cmoski wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem you've identified is that using a skill is available only to those who have bothered to hone the skill. Why should we have to bother learning something? It's simply not fair. If I want to be an artist I shouldn't have to practise or educate myself. The simple desire to be an artist should be enough! Note: I don't really care if people use AI to generate anything but they should be forthright about doing s…

It’s not fair? It’s not fair that should need to learn something? This is really a sad state. HN seems to be becoming a pretty sad group.

It was said mockingly.
Post reply on HN