511–520 of 593 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> why do you think AI products may not have tastes? Because it can't feel. Get used to it. It can't feel, and what ever it comes up with, would be an imitation of someone real who can feel. So it can generate stuff that can cater to a taste, but the thing itself can't have tasts. It is fundamental. Arguing about it all day wont change it.
I don't think you understand, but you effectively shutting down the discussion. Your choice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you don't think that OF models are using AI to reply to incoming chats from users, well I've got a bridge to sell ya.
No, I don't think OF models aren't using AI to respond to chat. Where did I say I thought that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not understanding how consciousness is created doesn't make it divine. Do you think it's an impossible task or just one we need more time to figure out?
I think we could understand consciousness perfectly and still find it divine. In fact, I think however it arises is probably so beautiful that it would be wrong not to call it divine. Of course not in a literal, theological sense, but I think the true deep complexity of the human brain and consciousness is worth the title.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We can't know if consciousness emerges but does it actually matter ? These entities, whoever they are, they act on our world, they are real, and more and more over time they will get independent from humans, eventually becoming different species that can self-replicate. For now they need legs and arms to interact with the physical world but I am certain that 100 years from now they will be an integral part of the soc…
Even if LLM will one day be autonomously updated, they started from us, from our knowledge. The human brain « is smart », it’s wired up to be in any kind of culture or knowledge. We fill up to be smarter from experience but LLM can’t do that, I can’t teach Claude something that it will use with you the next day, it needs to be retrained with knowledge stopping at some point. Even if technology catches up and the mach…
I'm building my personal home right now. The AI image models have been a game-changer in designing the look of the house. My architect did an OK job, but the details that Nano Banana added really bring the house up a notch. I just do hundreds of renders from the basic 3D models and I find looks that I like and iterate from there. We are implementing the renders from Nano Banana over our Interior Designers designs. We…
Part of the job of interior design is delivering the promised images in … yknow, physical reality? How are you going from nano banana images to actual plans, materials, finishes, products, paint codes, … ?
I'm sure this has been written about but here's what happens long term - images are commoditized and lose their emotional appeal. Probably about half of us here remember photos before the cell phone era. They were rare, and special, and you'd have a few photos per YEAR to look back on. The feel of photos back then, was at least 100x stronger than now. They were a special item, could be given as a gift. But once they…
In economic terms it's diminishing marginal utility.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe this is the reason for a return to interest in analog media with both my generation (millenials) and gen-z. I do wedding photography on the side, and the past ~2 years have seen a huge increase in requests for film photography, either exclusively film or as an add-on to digital. Offering film has been one of the best things I've done for my side hustle. Likewise with the sort of resurgence of vinyl, and the…
Interesting how this matches the Matrix timeline. According to Agent Smith, 1999 represented the height of human civilization before things started to decline. Not only 1999 prevents humans from becoming too advanced and invent new AI again, it is a believable and comfortable era. A perfect time, perfectly balanced between analog and digital.
The confines of our reality really are so small in the face of technology like this aren't they.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> being an embodied consciousness with the ability to create is as divine as it gets This is a very, very weak criterion for divinity. If this is truly it, we should prepare with great haste for the arrival of our artificial gods. Because by this (IMO silly) metric it seems they will be more divine than us.
Yeah id argue that all existence is equally sacred. But consciousness is where that is manifest most visibly.
Some random predictions about what AI image generation tools will do/are doing to art: 1. The narrative/life of the artist becomes a lot more important. The most successful artists are ones that craft a story around their life and art, and don't just create stuff and stop. This will become even more important. 2. Originality matters more than ever. By design, these tools can only copy and mix things that already exis…
I think the most important is number 2. People are now looking for things that are made by humans. Most detest AI slop. And if they find out that you are peddling slop, you lost trust. It seems to me that we will go through the same phases that chess went through when chess on computers became a thing. First, people thought that this will kill chess, then people start using it as a tool to play better chess. Now, che…
On the other hand, absolutely nobody is watching livestreams of two chess bots playing each other. They might technically be better at chess, but that doesn't mean it makes for entertaining content.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People will continue to retreat into walled, trusted networks where they can have more confidence in the content they see. I can’t even be sure I’m responding to a real person right now.
As long as HackerNews community keeps the quality of the conversation high (with or without AI), I don’t think many of us will question this too much
I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I don't really read too deeply into whether text is AI generated or not. On social platforms like HN I tend to just skim many comments anyway so it's not like the concept of "they spent no time writing so you shouldn't spend time reading" really applies.
I know some people use apps like Grammarly to improve their language and stuff, which I can respect. But at what point do we draw the line between AI assisted text and AI generated text?
I sometimes use AI to do research into the nuance of some topics to help me formulate a response and synthesize ideas, but if I ever get to the point where I'd be asking AI generate a response to the comment then I find it better to just not respond at all.