So, I'm a musician, who wants to have a musical career (a lot of communist musicians had stable careers) and meanwhile stupid porkies tell me that "no, we'd prefer if you were replaced, prole, because there if no place for people like you" and I hear, not only music, but other art, computer science, programming etc. will be replaced by AI. How do we stop this, so people are still prosperous in the real socialst societies?
>>27567 (me)
Oh and write things in a way that doesn't sound like an allistic with alsheimers and a 3rd grade reading level.
>>27559The whole "AI is taking over the arts" is just indignation made by artists.
AI is a tool. Its not workable by itself.
AI uses pre-existing samples of media.
All it does is it makes a mishmash of new data based on preexisting ones.
It still needs a human to do the final touches.
I remember back in the 2000s and 10s when we had haptic auxiliary pads for computers.
When people made manual digital art using a stylus and a haptic pad, people were freaking out about how digital art was replacing physical art.
The same was said about digital sampler keyboards in music.
Take the Synclavier and Fairlight Computer Synthesizer.
They were the hot shit in the 1980s.
People were freaking out about those machines replacing musicians
Take On Me by aHa and Never Gonna Give You Up by Rick Ashley used those machines to make the song.
Or digital audio workstations.
Which are digital sampler keyboards on a computer.
Same thing.
Also, when it comes to arts and crafts, professional careers made out recreational activities are always scarce and rely solely on corporations.
If you're worried about being replaced by AI as an artist, than it's not AI but your shot at being in business as a musician.
If anything we need to stop philosophising recreational professions so much.
>>27575Typography? You mean calligraphy?
Or you mean like printing press kind of deal?
If you mean printing press in terms of typography, then you know that typography was demonsoed by calligraphy.
Before printing press, copies of books and newsletters has to be remade by hand.
When printing press came along in the fifteenth century, calligraphers were in crisis.
Also, manual can be digital, not just analog.
>>27577This
People think automation or new tech means less human input.
Tech is not transcendent.
It requires someone to something to move it, externally or internally.
>>27582Useless in terms of a profession
Music doesn't help make food or electrolytes water.
It doesn't help grow crops
It's a recreational activity
If you do music as a hobby that's ok.
>>27582Art shouldn't be subject of profit motive.
Establish socialism -> automation is used to help people
Live under capitalism -> all tech advancement is used to make life worse
Fighting against tech advancement under capitalism is a battle lost centuries ago.
>>27586Too bad. We will evacuate all twelve communists out of it, and turn the rest into a large open air gulag. Don't worry, it'll be a catholic and
polish gulag.
>>27584Those were state assigned propaganda artists.
Just like how city halls have media departments to make public service advertising
>>27589This. People really have no cultural history.
They always assume any new forms of tech are automatically destroying life as we know it.
>>27589>AI literally works by continuing the previous token with the most probable next tokenThat's how the organic brain works,buddy
>you are not an artist, you are an obsolete petite bourgeois of the culture industry that is getting angry like a Luddite against your competitors using a machine to make the exact same product that you do, but cheaper.This rebellion of service industries against the modernity is hilarious. The high and mighty leaders of opinions getting scared over some dumb machines replacing them
>>27592They'll eventually use AI to hallucinate an entire OS like they are making AI hallucinate Minecraft with Oasis
>>27589you're a retard
just because ai is taking market share from furry hentai artists (it's not just them, it has an enormous affect on things like junior programmers and a lot of other 'non-creative' industries) doesn't mean it isn't going to come along and replace whatever you currently do as well
are you a truck driver? you will get replaced by automated vehicles. electrician, plumber, carpenter? all it will take is some dumbass with a tablet that gives him explicit instructions on how to fix everything as he just puts on goggles that let the machine see everything for him, and once they make the mechanical manipulation part feasible they won't even need that guy. mechanic? you're basically already done bud. programmer/software engineer? hahaha yea what job could be more safe from automation than putting numbers in a computer
>>27596>electrician, plumber, carpenter? all it will take is some dumbass with a tablet that gives him explicit instructions on how to fix everything as he just puts on goggles that let the machine see everything for himThe thing with those jobs is that people off the streets can't fix anything even with somebody guiding them. And "mechanical parts" will always cost more because there's just soooo much organic parts running around the place
But educated positions? Oh, they are going the way of a job called "calculator"
>>27597>The thing with those jobs is that people off the streets can't fix anything even with somebody guiding them.Yes they fucking can retard, 99% of the shit your hvac dad fixes is just fiddling some valve or flipping a switch
a fucking tablet with sufficient visual sensors can literally point anybody exactly to what do with an integrated hud
it doesn't take a whole replacement to drive down wages sufficiently anyway, it just requires a massive replacement of most of the labor pool and suddenly you have no room to negotiate with porky regardless of your esteemed 'trade license' that you had to lick the ass of some older contractor to get
>>27599>a fucking tablet with sufficient visual sensors can literally point anybody exactly to what do with an integrated hudYou are underestimating non-specialists' helplessness, lmao
>you have no room to negotiate with porkyThe only thing those jobs fear is uberization of a sort, where a big company coordinates a large share of the labor pool and then can dictate the terms. But even then taxi drivers just like switched over to uber instead of getting replaced.
AI-driven cars are kind of retarded though, it's a costly computerized solution to a logistical-organizational problem that's solved by trains and buses
>>27600the point is not ai, it's automation in general, ai is merely a new component of further automation
automation WILL replace every worker the longer capitalism goes on, this includes your hvac uncle, plumbers, carpenters, etc
even when automation doesn't work to replace those workers, porky will have replaced so many other sectors that it will drive competition to your sector so fiercely you wlll lose all negotiation power and porky will just subjugate you the old fashioned way
>>27601It won't, just how capitalism wasn't able to replace individual self-employed workers for centuries
But it's funny to me that you think that I only able to say this because I feel myself secure in my HVCA dad or uncle. What next? Are you going to say that we must protect the jobs and incomes of furry artists?
>>27598Ok now with that attitude I can see why some others on here said your profession is useless.
It's always the elitists who are against new tech.
The real problem with capitalism is that it makes people think that arts and crafts are inherently virtuous and essential to society as a career.
>>27593>That's how the organic brain works,buddyLiterally untrue, actually unprovable, and even if we were parrots like you say there would be 8 billion unique parrot brains that function by integrating far more information domains than merely language or merely sound (which AIs so far treat only separately, unlike humans); it is simply impossible for an operation of reduction over a compartmentalized fraction of the output of these brains to have more capacity of producing something new than the individual brain itself.
>>27594why the fuck are you telling me all that you mouthbreather my post was talking specifically about art and nothing else
>>27601>>27599This is someone who doesn't understand trades work at all.
I job shadowed irrigation and HVAC.
It's not as simple as fiddling switches and levers.
You are a fucking retard.
Automation is only gonna speed up and multiply produce.
It's gonna reduce manufacture workers, not installers.
>>27604I have no clue what you wanted to say
Human brain works on neurons that establish connections between each other, and those connections upon "hearing a word" flare up with a certain chance, randomly, first one to flare up continues the thought. Moreso, brain research shows that concepts/tokens in human brain are physically located in such a way that closely related ideas remain close (with "in-built" concepts, such as vision, literally connected to our physical eyes, motorics/movements to hands/legs, etc), same way AI is organized (but AI uses a hell of a lot of dimensions and axis)
The only way to claim that human consciousness is essentially distinct from AI consciousness is to believe in a soul or something
>>27606the installation process will just be engineered to accommodate the automation process
your job is not safe, your dads hvac small business days are numbered
licking ass during your apprenticeship doesn't represent your gritty fortitude and commitment to the job, it's just some gay shit you did with another man
>>27583Why didn't you start by phrasing it like that?
>>27581 makes it sound like you hate music and musicians
>>27613I'm not hvac guy, don't have hvac uncle or father or brother or even sister, I merely entertained your butthurt
"Easy physical labor" jobs are not so easy. It's your bias speaking. Try fucking making something with your hands, and do it right on the first try. THAT SAID, basically everyone can learn doing it. Does this mean they will, or does this mean they'll do it right? Hell no
Also, what's your issue with apprenticeship? I'm not a burger, so don't know what's your gripe with hvac is
>>27589>If your art is so unorginal, commercial and predictable that it is actually losing ground to AI slop then it isn't art, it is a commodity, and you are not an artist, you are an obsolete petite bourgeois of the culture industry that is getting angry like a Luddite against your competitors using a machine to make the exact same product that you do, but cheaper.What you are talking about is current ai though? What about future ai like asi.
These types of ai would be able to produce art better faster and maybe more original than human art. In that type of situation how would human artists be able to compete?
>>27614Nah, the abundance of labor created by AI forcing people out of their jobs will uplift some other industry, and on top of that we talk about cheap and plentiful labor everywhere in every field
Even if you expect AI to take over EVERY job, and also somehow block people from getting employed, even then you'll get people just create jobs for the unemployed or self-employ outside of "AI-capitalist" system
>>27617>you'll get people just create jobs for the unemployed or self-employ outside of "AI-capitalist" systemthat just sounds like the capitalists will live in their high tech "utopias"
meanwhile us the proles or "lesser" people will be kicked outside to fend for ourselves.
pretty grim picture
>>27619>and that NEVER happened in history.because something like asi and mass scale automation never happened before.
All our past inventions still required the human operator to monitor and manage it. Meanwhile asi has the potential to run fully by itself.
Once porkie automates the majority of the processes. And have asi and robotics to monitor and manage such automation. Then why would humans be needed here?
>>27620That's not feudalism. Feudalism is a bunch of hereditary parasites owning land and extracting rent from it's use, sometimes with serfdom enforced, sometimes even with slavery
What is described in this antiutopia is like rich people's fully automated luxury gay space communism with huge swathes of humanity being simply unneeded. That's not going to happen. Israel-Gaza situation is only possible Israel wants land and is supported by capitalism. Luxury gay space capitalist communism would require no land, no rent and whatever else
>but muh resourcesWell then, such a system is not insulated, and the rest of humanity isn't unneeded
>>27615hvac bros in burgeristan are annoying dipshits who drive around in over sized trucks and listen to country music and voted for trump because they think he fix the egg prices
they have a "I'm a simple minded man with a brain the size of a peanut and my work is as basic as apple pie" mentality while simultaneously reverting to how important, gritty, challenging, and irreplacable their form of 'labor' is when their egos are challenged even slightly by anything
they hate college education because of how arcane and extravagant it seems to them to obtain a credential to do a specific thing as a certification of expertise, while… having a lifestyle based on undergoing an arcane extravegent process to obtain a credential indicating expertise known as apprenticing
they think unionizing is gay and so is taxing the rich and shit, they're just obnoxious class traitors whose answer to every capitalist critique is 'do trade' as if their sector of the market is immune to ever being pushed out when it isn't
I've done physical labor jobs, I've worked on factory lines, I've fixed my own water pipes and heaters n shit. they aren't comparable
>>27622okay and no offense but what does that prove?
The majority of our current economy still requires human laborers to do things. Those noble idiots are just a minority. The majority of the top are still capitalists who due to current technology and economic conditions, still need human labor.
What im talking about is later when full scale mass automation and asi makes it so human labor isnt needed. We have no where reached this type of situation.
>>27626you believe that would be the fate of capitalists?
Clinging to the old ways?
hmmm
>>27628This is complicated because If we examine german,japanese, british and many other capitalists, a lot of them were descended from aristocrats or connected to them.
And regarding the high tech asi thing a lot of silicon valley capitalists advocate for this transition (peter thiel and the cult of techno accelerationism.) So a chunk of the capitalists themselves already want to transition into such a system long term.
>>27629Not everyone was an idiot, besides, starting capitals have to come from somewhere. Where German, Japanese, British capitalists had private starting capitals (and state contracts), elsewhere, like in Russia, emperor himself was ordering construction of heavy industries and putting future famed industrialist families in charge
And yeah, there are techbros. But just like with capitalism coming out of feudalism, it's just not possible without a bloody revolution, and if it's a bloody revolution, communists will steal that one and steer it towards communism
This kind of antiutopia is just anachronistic, it's on the same spectrum as fascist dreams about farmer families
>>27589Why do lay people with no background in computer science regularly relay this midwit talking point when actual computer scientists admit they understand the architecture that goes into producing these LLMs but do not fully understand how they actually take in this information and produce their outputs
Like I never read this from actual engineers and compsci people, only normies with Dunning-Krueger
>>27633>>27621>>27614>>27610>Thinks automationnis magic, that it won't require hardware and software specialists.
>Thinks doing "basic trades" only requires a YouTube tutorial. You know this is how we get alot of hack doctors.
It sounds to me you have a serious contempt for trades.
>>27634The only venues for automating, as another anon has put it, installation jobs, is either mechanical hands or wholesale module replacement of showers and/or apartments. This is just not going to happen
>b-but medieval artisans…You just can take a random unemployed guy off the streets, give him a week course, and they can do the installation or maintenance job just fine and without errors. This is a kind of a job that's safe from automation, and in fact automatization makes such a job even easier and more accessible. It's not safe from uberization, though.
Also, read this from that anon
>>27624 >>27559>computer science, programmingWe're overall safe to be honest. This isn't the first time they tried to replace us. Must be their fourth attempt after COBOL, visual coding and UML at least; they never work because you need an actual person to translate requirements into actionable algorithms that aren't completely filled with bugs.
I do not know the state of the music industry, but I can see at least the lower rungs of commissioms from small indie game developers and other small producers drying up.
>>27632Most laymen rely the point that "AI taking over our jobs"
>>27624Sounds to me more like you hate doing trades.
That description of tradesmen as Trump voting country music loving hicks who despise college education and don't respect nor appreciate nuance nor complexity is something that a lot of anti work people say.
>>27612<makes it sound like you hate music and musiciansMy opinion was more general about all the different jobs being replaced by machines which is usually positive for the wellbeing of societies. Technological development is the core reason why economies grow and prosper.
When it comes to music, I value arts and crafts and wish these wouldnt be corrupted by profit motive but done for the sake of the artform itself.
>>27639It can. But again, ASI is a machine and machines can err. So it needs maintenance.
Even if it becomes autocorrecting, unless it's sentiment and sapient, it will need humans to meta-calibrate.
>>27641>ASI is a machine and machines can err.same thing with humans.Humans often err too but then correct themselves. Which is what asi could at one point do
>Even if it becomes autocorrecting, unless it's sentiment and sapientwell asi would increasingly reach the sentient and sapient point. Thats the concerning factor
>>27643I think the real fear of AI is mostly moral projection. All the technophobic cries of "robots are gonna enslave humans" is dumb.
Humans have enslaved and killed each other long before the first TV or radio
If anything, humams are more likely to enslave robots.
In fact, "robot" means "servant".
If robots take over the human race, it will be due to being abused for human convenience
>>27645Im not really concerned that robots are going to enslave humans.
More concerned that porkie will just use robots to make the proles and "lesser" people irrevelent.
Of course porkie may be incapable of doing it as the other anon pointed out. But then again there has been situations where sections of the ruling class reformed society (meiji restoration)
>>27642The problem is that the hype means that people will believe the ai is 'intelligent' enough to make impact decisions that massive affect the lives of massive amounts of people
again, it abdicates the responsibility of shit like genocide and austerity to the fucking dell server in the it department and the shitty algorithm dystopia neoliberal hell we exist in will justify it because they will start deifying its 'intelligence' in the same way they do industry 'experts'
it will get even worse once they rig the shit well enough that it passes the standardized tests of professions like doctors and lawyers and proves it out-preforms them
>>27652They are already using ai to automatically deny job applicaitons and shit
its frightening.
>>27653they've already had algorithms and shit for a long time, they banned predictive policing or whatever because of this
the issue isnt the algorithm, its the cult of the machine technocratic libtards who are going to usher in this vaporware tech as the arbiter of any and all 'socially difficult' problems
>>27657>>27658Who wants to bet that alot of the algorithms are actually just custom made codes that can be easily updated whenever the overlords want?
That it's not some super autonomous software?
>>27662Every ruling ideology had "science" prove it right. Feudalism had theology, capitalism has a whole bunch of economics, sociology and at one time had cybernetics, yadda yadda. We communists always get into fights when yet another idiot falls into the trap of believing that bourgeois historians wouldn't fucking lie about Soviet war losses, USSR has tooootally lost 27 million people and had horrible K/D ratio, yadda yadda
It's nothing fucking new
>>27660so a farce just like all religions
wouldnt be suprised
>>27666>Every ruling ideology had "science" prove it rightYeah based on parameters set by the unscientific, the whole fear that Cyberpunk fiction was oriented around was that
technically speaking such societies were ideal and a fabulous utilisation of technology to revolutionise society, but only for the people who lead society and sell the technology and thus gives the impetus for cyberPUNKS to rebel against.
Whereas the mass hysteria around AI is not just "it's going to replace all our jobs" but also that it's a decision maker of not just process but also of goals and that makes all the difference to previous automations. Like Musk is shitting on other AIs with this claim that they're all influenced by the programming of their "woke" creators, but only to sell his own AI as being "objective" and therefore an AI one can trust.
>>27668it sounds like they are making the modern version of theocracy.
But instead of the christian god its the machine god
very very fucking grim
>>27649>The problem is that the hype means that people will believe the ai is 'intelligent' enough to make impact decisions that massive affect the lives of massive amounts of peopleOkay, fair point.
I hope there'll be a critical mass of people getting burned by AI to learn how bad its hallucination is, like those lawyers in the US who cited nonexistent case law after using ChatGPT.
>>27677dont get angry
its bad for you
>>27671>>27672>>27673>>27674>>27665>>27663You know, not to sound like a schizo, but sentient AI can never be.
The only way that can happen is either humans transfer their consciousness into an AI shell or we get spirit beings to occupy the machines.
Sentience is not something that can be made by humans
>>27593> That's how the organic brain works,buddyIf so you should make a paper about it and receive 80 nobel prizes.
>This rebellion of service industries against the modernity is hilarious.True
>>27596>are you a truck driver? you will get replaced by automated vehicles. electrician, plumber, carpenter? all it will take is some dumbass with a tablet that gives him explicit instructions on how to fix everything as he just puts on goggles that let the machine see everything for him, and once they make the mechanical manipulation part feasible they won't even need that guy. mechanic? you're basically already done bud. programmer/software engineer? hahaha yea what job could be more safe from automation than putting numbers in a computer< t marketing spooks beliver >>27693Theology is not a real science. Present day lay men know that theology isn't a real science as well. But back in the day it was a science, and it produced justifications for the ruling class to continue ruling.
Where do "Westoid OrthoChristcuck touritsts" come into the picture?
>>27682Officially we still don't know how the brain actually works. We know of influences etc but sure.
As for AI, it's not really give a mismash of data. During training, the network is fed a consciously broken or incomplete input, which is then processed with a serie of weights until.we have an output. Then we confront the output with our actual complete input, and if the output it's not of our likimg, we change the weights and start over again
https://freedium.cfd/https://towardsdatascience.com/understanding-llms-from-scratch-using-middle-school-math-e602d27ec876 >>27698>Regarding the issue of AI art, paradoxically it will benefit artists, since in an oversaturated market of AI garbage there will be people who want to stand out and will pay artists well because they will be more in demand.that is not at all how the art market works and you've obviously never tried to participate in it
art was basically worthless before ai, but it's now truly utterly dead
this isn't an accurate description because 'art' itself is never worthless, it's more like it's value is highly subjective but there is always demand for it
the labor that goes into making art however is totally worth fuck all
the only way this trend will truly reverse is if artists stop sharing their works publicly in mass and stop feeding the algorithms so the ais just poison themselves to death
>>27700>so the ais just poison themselves to deathNever going to happen, even if you somehow manage to ban artists from sharing works publicly,
AI art only gets better. There's an issue of "default settings" models hugging all the space, but just like in "proper art", when people bother improving prompts, or start training, or what else, you get very good results. Mixing multiple artists gives the most unique looks, add to that postures, add to that the function where they connect multiple small outputs into a single bigger output seamlessly, etc etc.
It's an artistic tool, and what you are doing is getting outraged at what is analogous to tiktok filters as if those are all there is to AIs
>>27701its a fucking statistical algorithm
it prints 1s and 0s in an order based on a data set
>>27706skill is the application of intuition
your brain has a literal skill issue
>>27697>asiFrom a brief research, that's just AGI++
>>27703Please go fetch your nobel
>>27701>Never going to happenIt's already a problem with both image and text generators. So much stuff was generated that it is, even accidentally, being fed back into the training data, which causes an overall loss in quality and variety of the output
https://srinstitute.utoronto.ca/news/training-ai-on-machine-generated-text-could-lead-to-model-collapsehttps://apnews.com/article/ai-artificial-intelligence-training-data-running-out-9676145bac0d30ecce1513c20561b87d>AI art only gets better.Yesn't. As I said there's the ouroboros problem, plus we're already reached the limit of linear progress in model development due to hardwere, data and algorithm constrains.
https://www.reuters.com/breakingviews/ai-models-slowdown-spells-end-gold-rush-era-2024-12-12/AI will keep developing, but as it stands now the speed of development and innovation will slow down significantly; safe miraculous algorithmic breakthroughs
>>27709>adversarial attacksDunno. Never saw it being reported anywhere as an actual problem that's limiting training data expansion
Also, isn't pixel encodimg quite trivial to defend against? Just re-encode the image before feeding it into the AI. The file must report it's encoding somewhere otherwise otherwise opening the file in any viewer or editor will make it look all weird, with colors switched around and such.
>because some spokesperson from Google said that trying to find such adversarial attacks is bad??????????????????????????????????????
I really don't follow MSM. No idea what google said.
>>27710It's usuful for reverse dictionaries, translation, image cropping, tagging, duplicate finding and such.
I read somewhere that the thing with AI is that, once it fimds a useful application, it stops being marketed as AI and is instead presented and marketed as a solution to whatever the program is targeting.
hit me up when AI can generate something like this
and have it
>closely match the written prompt of the user, including composition, poses, physical objects present, weather, background, foreground, etc.>have the outfits and physical descriptions of the multiple people actually match, rather than mixing people up with each other>not give each person 11 fingers and 12 toes>not introduce historical anachronisms into the painting>not generally look like a statistical soup of what a robot thinks human life is likeAI (currently)
<requires humans to curate training data<requires humans to write and maintain complex high level software <relies on lower level software and operating system, which dependencies are constantly becoming incompatible with each other due to uncoordinated and unplanned updates<relies on ever increasing hardware demands on a planet with finite resources and inefficient energy usageHitherto all advances in technology:
>have augmented the talents of existing humans>have not eliminated humans from their own creative work>have only served as means of productionRead Marx:
"About 1630, a wind-sawmill, erected near London by a Dutchman, succumbed to the excesses of the populace. Even as late as the beginning of the 18th century, sawmills driven by water overcame the opposition of the people, supported as it was by Parliament, only with great difficulty. No sooner had Everet in 1758 erected the first wool-shearing machine that was driven by water-power, than it was set on fire by 100,000 people who had been thrown out of work. Fifty thousand workpeople, who had previously lived by carding wool, petitioned Parliament against Arkwright’s scribbling mills and carding engines. The enormous destruction of machinery that occurred in the English manufacturing districts during the first 15 years of this century, chiefly caused by the employment of the power-loom, and known as the Luddite movement, gave the anti-Jacobin governments of a Sidmouth, a Castlereagh, and the like, a pretext for the most reactionary and forcible measures. It took both time and experience before the workpeople learnt to distinguish between machinery and its employment by capital, and to direct their attacks, not against the material instruments of production, but against the mode in which they are used."
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch15.htm>>27701>>27616I don't blame you because it is the colloquial definition, but you don't understand what art means. First because you are confusing artistic creation with the production of an object. For a hundred years now art theory has already gotten to the conclusion that art was never in the process of manufacturing the object (a painting, a book, etc) itself but in the formal decisions that were behind this process. If you go to a museum and see a white room with a chair and a wheel over it, what could have AI done "more efficiently" to create that? The artist didn't even make any of the objects exposed, he just bought them and put them in a certain order. There is no work to be automated, only the inventive gaze of the artist. I put this as an extreme case to illustrate the point that even if Picasso hadn't literally used his hand to paint Guernica, Guernica would've still been a masterpiece. When photography was invented it automated all the manual processes of creating realistic images (think perspective lines, geometry to calculate the perfect shadow etc, like the Renaissance painters did). Did visual art as a medium stop existing? It didn't. The
artists didn't lose their jobs because they simply don't operate on the same field as the production of objects. Some other people lost their jobs: professional portraitists, the guys who would make anatomical drawings of animals for the encyclopedias, etcetera. But they weren't making art, they were making images to be consumed by a certain industry that were incidentally artistic. With AI it is exactly the same. Superhero movies will start being AI generated, the next Taylor Swift will be a robot, the next young adult saga will be AI. But these things were never art, they were commodities. And your local independent webcomic artist wasn't making art either, he just cares about selling his craft, like an artisan. AI can (badly) replicate Cubism now but it could've never invented Cubism in the 20s because in the 20s there wasn't a single Cubist pixel in the input data; definitionally, not because of it's technical limitations, AI can only replicate, and replication is an effective way of optimizing a production chain but has nothing to do with artistic creation.
And as a second point, even if you fetishize the manual process of manufacturing the artistic object, there is literally nothing stopping humanity from simply setting the rule that whatever isn't artisanal will stop being considered art. This has already happened somehow in gastronomy. The most efficient way of producing food is in a big factory that carefully measures nutrimental balance and flavor chemicals. But you don't see canned food or McDonalds recieving Michelin stars, they are reserved for restaurants in France where you pay ten times more for a less optimal way of producing food, and it's not about their food tasting better, it's that the field is definitionally restricted to products being actually created by human hands. I can definitely see a near future in which AI replaces wattpad writers and actual novelists will have to earn a certificate of authenticity before being selectable for a literary prize, and the same on the rest of the fields, but there'd be nothing wrong with it, artists in a proper sense will not be affected.
>>27721Honestly the ideal would be if it only gave you what you described, and could give you errors if you put it in a position where it has to guess.
Until prompting is as frustrating as programming in Rust, then it won't be ready.
>>27559>im a poor poor artisan and we (who?) "need" to fight against any technological advancements that will force me to get a different joblol this thread is dogshit
you think a bunch of freelance musicians can ever represent a threat to capital, even if they went on strike (lol)?
>>27563communism isnt about "people" (who?) "deserving" (lmao) to "feel safe" (how vague)
>>27576>These are the people you should really be putting the most effort into, to be frank.lmfao not only are you a retard who believes communism is about convincing pbs to change their minds but you unironically believe theyre more important than uh, already existing proletarian struggle
>>27566>Artists like musicians are now in direct competition to their corporate patrons for profitsnow? pretty sure the pb have been in competition with the haute bourgeois since ever
>>27559Step 1: read Marx
Step 2: stop making shit threads like this and stop saying stupid shit
We don't need to stop AI, this is some liberal hogwash.
Rude sage.
>>27722> I don't blame you because it is the colloquial definition, but you don't understand what art means. First because you are confusing artistic creation with the production of an object. For a hundred years now art theory has already gotten to the conclusion that art was never in the process of manufacturing the object (a painting, a book, etc) itself but in the formal decisions that were behind this process. If you go to a museum and see a white room with a chair and a wheel over it, what could have AI done "more efficiently" to create that? The artist didn't even make any of the objects exposed, he just bought them and put them in a certain order. There is no work to be automated, only the inventive gaze of the artist.Why would a asi not be capable of doing this "inventive gaze of the artist". And why wouldnt it be capable of doing this quickly and better than humans do?
Wouldnt asi that increasingly goes beyond the limitations of human mental capacity, be able to do this "inventive gaze" better and faster than human capacities?
>>27727
If it works like these language models work, which is by producing the most probable outcome out of their input data and the user prompt, it's logic is intrinsically contradictory with the creation of anything inventive. If you are writing a book and your next word is always the most expected word considering the previous ones (I know AI doesn't know "words", I'm making an analogy) you are not making literature, you will be making literature the moment your next word is the most improbable one. Then you may need to follow with something expected in order to make it digestable, but the artistic moment was in picking precisely the concept that most of the books before you didn't have; AIs are programmed to do exactly the opposite.
It helps if you correctly define AIs as what they are, a model of how language works, and it is amazing at producing and processing natural language, but poetry (by taking language as an example; applies to every field) is precisely making the effort of not talking either how normal human beings do neither how previous poets did. You can make a marketable piece that will sell well by making poetry like it has already been done, but it won't be art. Asking a model to produce an extravagant result rarely found in the universe is like asking a statistical model to only produce outliers.
And this is without considering the crucial fact that the human brain integrates and mixes language processing, visual processing, sound, sensible stimulus, unique memories, etcetera, while AI so far is compartmentalized: ChatGPT is trained only on words, those image generators are trained only on images, etc., while the human brain intermixes these domains at the moment of artistic creation.
And you have a very shallow definition of art if you think it's about mental capacity or doing things quickly or even good. You are extarpolating to aesthetic events a frame of evaluation only applicable to goods produced in an economy.
>>27729>language modelsasi and agi arent language modules. Some people even criticize language models as not being true ai.
>And this is without considering the crucial fact that the human brain integrates and mixes language processing, visual processing, sound, sensible stimulus, unique memories, etcetera, while AI so far is compartmentalized: ChatGPT is trained only on words, those image generators are trained only on images, etc., while the human brain intermixes these domains at the moment of artistic creation.thats the goal of agi and asi.Replicating all of this but with a machine artificial general intelligence. Making a artificial mind that is comparable to the emergent consciousness and mind of the human one.
>And you have a very shallow definition of art if you think it's about mental capacity Well what is it then? If the inventive gaze of the artist requires memory, inner introspection, experiences,abstract thought,perspectiveand all other sorta things,then asi can do it, and faster too.
What exactly is unique about the human "inventive" gaze of the artist that asi couldnt do?
>>27730>Making a artificial mind that is comparable to the emergent consciousness and mind of the human one.I'm not discussing science fiction here. The only things that exist right now are language models. Even if you combine different types of them, as long as they operate by probablity they will still be antithetical to art because art is about improbability. The very process of training an AI is made by continually making it choose the path that most closely ressembles the average of it's training dataset: this is exactly the contrary of art. AI is made by punishing the divergent and unlikely responses and reinforcing the ones that are most coherent with the rest of the dataset. If anything, if we could see the output of a half-trained AI there would be more artistic things there, when it produces stuff such as "a banana is a republic" instead of "a banana is a fruit".
This is not to defend the human condition per se, if a machine could actually replicate the intricacies of the human brain I would have no trouble recognizing it as a person and as an artist, but it won't work if we keep dessigning them with the objective of closely ressembling human language. You train a machine to act like a person and it would be like the average person is, which is not artistic; you train a machine to act like most artists do and it will be a dilettante, an imitator, a maker of pop digestable products. It would definitely be possible if we built the AIs specifically to be half-trained and let them make mistakes from time to time and told it to work around them when producing discourse or sounds or images, but at that point it would be a different kind of AI altogether, and one that is useless at any task, so nobody would put money on it.
>memory, inner introspection, experiences,abstract thought,perspectiveI can theoretically get abstract thought, but memory? Experiences? AIs don't have those unless you are now going full scifi and talking about robots and that
>>27566>>27567Artists were never prosperous professions for most.
>>27725This. It's always bohemians and idealists and ivory tower folk who think any new form of tech/media is evil
>>27732well anon my original comment that you responded to was about asi.
I was talking specifically about asi and not language modules
>I can theoretically get abstract thought, but memory? Experiences? AIs don't have those unless you are now going full scifi and talking about robots and thatyeah im talking about the future scifi stuff like asi. Robotics will be connected to asi.
>>27737The camera serves a function that was unprecedented. AI came too late, digital art already excels at anything it's been purported to be useful for.
- Want the computer to make a new picture of a character quickly? Rigs.
- Want trippy visuals? Shaders, procedural art and drugs.
- Want to get content without paying for labor? Target your product at economically illiterate youths.
- Wanna get rid of surplus oil or computer parts? Rug a meme coin.
>>27746I'm coming at this from the angle that AI is just a tool. Better tools exist and predate it. When it comes to art people will pick tools that grant them the precision they want. The reason prompt-based AI is even desirable in the first place is that it isn't precise.
It's as though you're ridiculing the suggestion that key is still useful when shotguns can just blast the door open.
>>27747 (me)
And like even in the realm of being inprecise you still have existing tech for that. Custom brushes can automate a lot of tedious operations, like whole strands of anime hair, or whole rows of books in bookshelves.
>>27721to prove the point made in this post, I described the painting to an AI as follows:
>A crowd of cossacks gathered around a small wooden table in a military camp. They are drinking, smoking, laughing. Two literate bureaucrats write a letter to the Ottoman sultan full of vulgar insults suggested by the cossacks. The cossacks have oseledets and long moustaches. The bureaucrats have black garments and bowl cuts. The cossacks smoke from wooden pipes. Some of them have bloodied bandages on their heads, sabers at their waste. They wear lutes and flasks. They wear rifles and fur coats. They have many different sorts of hats. Some of them have earrings. Some of them go shirtless. Spears and banners are held by men on horseback in the background. In the foreground a man sitting on a barrel loses his balance from laughing too hard. Everyone has a different pose.Pic related 1 is all that I received. Now compare that with the actual masterpiece by Ilya Repin, pic related 2. AI is DOG SHIT.
>>27699my cracker in christmas you can go to youtube and learn this stuff in less than 10 minutes
>>27696isn't this just a roundabout way of saying the same thing since the "consciously broken or incomplete input" relies on massive sets of pre-curated training data which constitutes the statistical soup that the AI draws from when producing an informed estimate of what a human would desire as output?
you can really tell the class background of the average poster when looking at the reactions of less people needing to commission artists for fetish porn or whatever the fuck
>>27759now compare the effort of doing one and the other
Notice the shift in the petit-bourgeois attitude towards piracy and copyright from the early 2000s to today, especially after AI became mainstream. Risk of proletarianization makes for the most vicious reactionaries.
>>27797>>27798>>27806So many things use more water than AI, like payment processors, but normies can only parrot "arguments" they saw on a tweet.
>>27816Well ultimately piracy helps with discoverability. Every indie game I've pirated I ended up buying. Even works for large scale productions, as seen with anime. There's even cases where people put their own work on piracy sites and get like 10 times as much sales because pirates either buy it after or make it culturally relevant enough that other people buy it.
This is why I've stopped bothering with pirating AAA games, since it feels like you're just getting tricked into playing them so you reccomend them to friends. I'd rather just not play AAA games at all, even if I can get them for free.
>>27828Because search engines are a fundamentally retarded premise. The only time I've even acually
needed a search engine was:
- undocumented software: which was undocumented because the devs knew people could just use a search engine.
- a website is collapsing and a user I was trying to find elsewhere didn't link to a website or any other social, because they assumed their username was unique enough a search engine would help. (75% of the time it didn't)
The only reason search engines exist is to make people think it's acceptable not to link to things, in turn forcing you to search for things because no one linked to them.
>>27844>what is that, is it like the notbob eepsite in i2p?I have no clue what that is lol, but back in the day you found websites usually by using a directory. A directory is just like it says on the tin, a directory of websites that you submit your website to and file it under the appropriate category.
So like if you wanted to find a Pokemon fan board, you wouldn't go to google and type "pokemon fan board." You just go to Games>fanboard>Pokemon or something like that.
https://cognitiveseo.com/blog/21291/web-directories-seo/ >>27909IMO the most undeniable issue in the first one is the rear lights on the blue car, as you can see in this pic
>>27910 one of the lights is super fat and one of them is super skinny, a person would never make that mistake
As for the bodies though they look ok to me, they are face down and somewhat sideways away from the camera
The whole concept of the pic doesn't even make sense anyways, why is the guy using a camera if his hands are covered in blood? Surely he realises that it's not time to take photos anymore even if he's a reporter or whatever, he's clearly killed a zombie already or something
>>27908Boooo
Why use ai art at this point in time? Someone will find and point it out to everyone
>>27961>you should kill yourselfwhy?
>What do you even believe you total fraudclass
>You have nothing. No sense of life inside of you. No belief in any in anyone elsewhy should i? this is just glittering generality, you have no argument beside vague moralistic whining.
>An utterly craven and empty husk who seeks violence and conflict for blood sportwhere have i demonstrated that i seek violence? what have i demonstrated that i am afraid of? do you have ANY evidence of my supposed cravenness?
you are seeing things that are not there.
>>27560>An AI can't perform live showsHoo boy…
>>27559reactionary garbage, robots reducing need for money exchange is literally a good thing
As an artist (who doesn't use AI) I… don't care.
It's tiresome when people confuse artisinal skill with artistic merit. They aren't the same.
In digital art we've had plugins and shaders for decades. None of these have killed the field, but they have raised the bar. And the recent achievements in AI are no different.
Like imagine thinking great works of art can be reduced to "pretty pictures". Which is what most of the AI stuff out there is. It's like beautiful fractals, but more advanced - they can still be pretty in their own right.
>But what if people think you're using AI!?Who cares? Do we split hairs over whether painters created their own paint? I wouldn't be able to do what I do if not for the work of
millions of people before me.
It doesn't distract from my artistic vision. Rather it is it's foundation.
>It's soullessThe datasets they're derived from weren't created in a vacuum. What AIs generate is a reflection of human artistic output. It's no more "soulless" than the slop which was being churned out before 2020.
>But how would you feel if somewhere were to copy YOUR styleImitation is the highest form of flattery isn't it? Besides, it's not like this didn't happen before.
Like have you noticed how samey Anime looks these days compared to the 80s and 90s? We were already living in an era of slop.
>>27589>If your art is so unorginal, commercial and predictable that it is actually losing ground to AI slop then it isn't art, it is a commodityThis is already the case with commissions, much of it is thinly veiled (or obvious) smut/fetishes
>>27984>It's like beautiful fractals, but more advancedNo wonder why Stable Diffusion fucks up the clothing and anatomy. It's literal mutations.
>It's no more "soulless" than the slop which was being churned out before 2020.Refer to the above.
Look, I am no artist but even I am getting sick of AI art. Not because "Oh, no, poor artists!" but because the technology is simply not there. And honestly, I'd rather not see a lot of the art from real "artists" either, learn how to FUCKING DRAW first before posting, Jesus Christ.
>>28010chatbots will NEVER become skynet
VC clowns will NEVER recoup their investment
people will NEVER care about chatting with a soulless corporate text generator
COPE, SEETHE and LOSE 10 trillion dollars bill gates
>>28035The machines the luddites/"neo-luddites" were against had a purpose and would persist and improve over time. The lathe was
not a scam to get companies ready to bankrupt and rugpull investors. Lathes are still used to this day.
Julien Crockett interviews sf author Ted Chiang on ethics in LLMs or the lack thereof. You can read the whole thing or just my snippets if you are lazy:
https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/life-is-more-than-an-engineering-problem/<…Alison Gopnik talks about how one way to “align” artificial intelligence with our goals and values could be the same way we align each new generation of humans, through caregiving.>I don’t like the phrase “the alignment problem.” It’s not clear to me that it refers to something meaningful—or at least that the phrase refers to something that is new and meaningfully different from the broader problems of how to be a good person and how to build a good society. For example, when corporations behave badly, should we consider that an alignment problem? Most of the conversation around the alignment problem suggests that it’s a technical problem, something that can be addressed by implementing a better algorithm or by solving the right equations. But why, for example, do large corporations behave so much worse than most of the people who work for them? (…) People who talk about aligning AI with human values imagine that if we could somehow solve this programming problem, then everything would be okay. I don’t see how that follows at all.
<Could there be value, though, in treating an AI system as more of a partner—something or someone with whom we develop a relationship—rather than merely as a tool?>It all depends on what you mean by “relationship.” If you’re a woodworker, you might develop emotional associations with a set of chisels you’ve used for years (…) To respect your colleagues means to pay attention to their preferences and interests and balance them against your own; when they do this to you in return, you have a good relationship. By contrast, your chisel has no preferences; it doesn’t want to be sharp (…) By contrast, if you don’t respect your colleagues, there is a problem beyond the fact that it might make your job harder; you do them harm because you are ignoring their preferences. That’s why we consider it wrong to treat a person like a tool; by acting as if they don’t have preferences, you are dehumanizing them. (…) The companies that sell AI systems might benefit if you develop an emotional relationship with their product, so they might create the illusion that AI systems have preferences. But any attempt to encourage people to treat AI systems with respect should be understood as an attempt to make people defer to corporate interests.>>27969This is a common sentiment amongst everyone.
"Robots are taking over the world."
No, humans are taking over the world with robots.
Robots are gonna be used and abused just like work animals were.
>>28224Methinks most of the hatred against AI is because "much human element". Most manually made fanart is often just some goofy cartoonish style.
AI usually uses more photorealistic style.
>>27753This. People will advocate for automation to save them from industrial activities
But when it comes to recreational activities, it's a blasphemy.
And these guys talk about "morality and value are spooks".
>>28224The real truth is that 1) the process of art "creation" is indirect, already art is a process of translating an ineffable abstract idea into the material reality, so having a layer inbetween makes harder to realize a creative vision. This is an inherent flaw that will never be fully addressed
2) AI really can really really just create derivative art, if you've been experimenting with genAI stuff, then you're probably aware that the more "subersive" your idea, the shittier the results, things look shitty and more and more "plaster-like", that's if the computer even manages to produce the concept at all. If you ask for a selfie, the results are indistinguishable from reality, but a selfie is incredibly mundane, the internet is filled with uninteresting selfies nobody gives a shit about. You can test the boundaries really easily if you start to request purposefully nonsense stuff, like a bunless burger. It's easy for us to conceptualize but for AI it's an impossible challenge. So for anything subversive AI is just not going to cut it.
In a better world, it'll be a cool exploratory tool, like an extremely beefed up version of the i-ching or stochastic music, art produced without human intervention is itself an intriguing idea. But since these things cannot exist merely as toys but need to produce a profit, then they're being leveraged as tools to erase the worker class, and that's a bit sad tbh.
>>28233It’s interesting timing for it to come out right after the announcement of $500 billion investment into data centers and energy for OpenAI. This is not necessarily good for them like AI hype usually is.
1. Leopold Asbergers has convinced many people that closed-source AI development was akin to the Manhattan project. It was absolutely necessary to root out Chinese spies and lock all AI knowledge under the highest levels of classification while we built the next nuclear bomb. Seems less compelling now.
2. Open source totally fucks the profit model of OpenAI. Instead it seems like Deepseek actually does view the profit from AI to be in its application and how it evolves the technology stack, rather than a dream of replacing the stack all at once.
3. Somewhat counters the “bitter pill” since they have a better model with less compute. Makes the impetuous for compute sanctions weaker and seem like cope. Note that’s only rational— the U.S. never accepts this logic and always believes these things indicate that sanctions were not applied hard enough or quick enough and need to be tripled down on.
4. Shows a fissure between technology and science advocates and US primacists. It’s interesting to consider the reaction of a U.S. company had released an open source model of the ability for this cost. There is a general consensus that Deepseek undermines U.S. advantage but a deep examination of how that advantage is made isn’t done, instead people quite lazily attribute OS to an anti-American plot. As if *all* AI companies arent trying to produce frontier models with the highest ability for the least compute possible and the only reason anyone would do this is to poke Americans in the eye.
Title: Desert Heat: Forbidden Passions
Genre: Soft-Core Historical Erotic Drama
Tagline: In a land divided by conflict, desire knows no borders.
Logline:
Set against the backdrop of 1930s Germany and the tumultuous birth of modern Israel, Desert Heat: Forbidden Passions weaves a steamy tale of lust, betrayal, and forbidden love. As political tensions rise, so do the passions of those caught in the crossfire. This sultry historical drama explores the untold stories of desire that simmer beneath the surface of the Haavara Agreement and the Nakba, where every touch is a rebellion and every kiss a secret act of defiance.
Act 1: The Haavara Agreement (1933-1939)
The film opens in smoky Berlin nightclubs, where Eli, a dashing Jewish businessman, navigates the dangerous allure of the Nazi era. Amidst the chaos, he strikes a deal with Hans, a brooding German officer, to secure safe passage for Jewish refugees to Palestine. But the tension between them isn’t just political—it’s electric. As they negotiate the terms of the Haavara Agreement, their clandestine meetings grow increasingly intimate, blurring the lines between enemy and lover.
Meanwhile, Leah, a fiery Zionist activist, catches Eli’s eye with her bold ideals and even bolder sensuality. Their connection ignites in the shadows of war, as they dream of a new life in Palestine. But when Leah discovers Eli’s secret trysts with Hans, jealousy and desire collide in a whirlwind of passion.
Act 2: The Seeds of Conflict (1940-1947)
As Jewish refugees arrive in Palestine, the heat of the desert fuels new desires. Eli and Leah settle into their new home, but their relationship is tested by the arrival of Khalid, a rugged Palestinian farmer with a magnetic presence. Khalid’s land is under threat, but his fiery spirit and smoldering gaze captivate Leah, sparking a forbidden affair that defies the growing tensions between their communities.
In a parallel storyline, Amina, Khalid’s sister, finds herself drawn to David, a brooding Jewish soldier tasked with enforcing the new settlements. Their secret rendezvous in olive groves and moonlit courtyards become a refuge from the chaos around them, but their love is as dangerous as it is intoxicating.
Act 3: The Nakba (1948)
As war erupts and the Nakba unfolds, the characters’ lives are torn apart by violence and displacement. Khalid’s village is destroyed, and he is forced to flee, leaving Leah behind. In a heart-wrenching farewell, their passion burns brighter than ever, a final act of defiance against the forces tearing them apart.
Eli, now a soldier, reunites with Hans in a tense, emotionally charged encounter. Their shared history and lingering desires culminate in a bittersweet moment of connection, as the world around them crumbles.
Meanwhile, Amina and David’s love is put to the ultimate test. As Amina’s family is forced to leave their home, she and David share one last, desperate embrace, their bodies speaking the words their hearts cannot.
Themes:
Forbidden love in a time of conflict.
The intoxicating power of desire to transcend boundaries.
The human cost of political upheaval, told through the lens of passion.
Why It Matters:
Desert Heat: Forbidden Passions is more than just a steamy historical drama—it’s a provocative exploration of the ways love and desire persist even in the darkest times. By intertwining the Haavara Agreement and the Nakba with tales of forbidden romance, the film offers a bold, sensual perspective on a pivotal moment in history.
Visual Style:
Lush and atmospheric, with sweeping desert landscapes, candlelit interiors, and sultry close-ups. Think The English Patient meets Fifty Shades of Grey, with a soundtrack of haunting melodies and pulsating rhythms.
Target Audience:
Fans of erotic dramas, historical romances, and boundary-pushing storytelling. Perfect for viewers who enjoyed The Night Porter, Belle de Jour, and Nymphomaniac.
Closing Line:
Desert Heat: Forbidden Passions is a bold, sensual journey through a land torn apart by conflict—where love and lust defy borders, and every touch is an act of rebellion.
>>28355thoroughly deserved. i hope the news of alibaba also releasing an AI model crashes this stock further.
terrible company, hope thei shovel-selling grift crashes upon them.
>>28417Yeah. I find it interesting that the trigger was an open-source model. It's not like the open-source really changes anything about the nature of AI.
It does mean that the "moat" is gone, which only matters to the corpo-monopolist. This was hype was allegedly about the underlying technology, but now it appears to have been about how that technology was going to be captured and controlled.
>>28417ai has always been hot air just like every other tech hype.
sure it is technologically impressive this time (unlike the blockchain or appify eveything kind of hypes) but it's not going to "revolutionize everything" like the hypebros are claiming. before the R1 release, they were again on their train of "AGI imminent", $500 billion stargate to epic meme stars and mars, etc. and the wind was deservedly knocked out of them.
>>27583>tile the earth, crack the crank>anything else is bourgeoisMust suck being you. Incidentally it's also very close to the muslim approach to art, which is a socio religious order that only went up when the leader of the time was lax with the religious tenets.
While profit seem to imply something exploitive, living off from a honest labor paid up to its true normal value is fine.
>>27589Kindly touch grass. Tools that generate pictures are limited on purpose but once they run at full power they have an uncanny ability to autocorrect themselves and present very good results while we're only on the doorsteps of this revolution and the potential seems very vast. These AI absorb more and more art styles, even traditional or last century propaganda ones.
It keeps getting better and you can already see the difference between the cheap prompts and the people who pay a lot to get the finest output.
Originality? The AIs are also built to come up with plot suggestions. They do thousands of billions of crossovers per micro-second. With luck some of these outputs will look decent enough.
Look at the tons of crap churned out in book, game or movie format. Will it be exceptional, like human exceptional? Perhaps never but the society will be formated to accept this sludge of works one step above average. In fact things will be so bland that any small aspect of originality will be hailed as fantastic from the jaded proles.
>>27602>It won't, just how capitalism wasn't able to replace individual self-employed workers for centuriesCapitalism drives wages so low for small companies that don't swim in money that they're virtually censored from the economic activity. Trusts keep growing because all world resources have to be managed by companies. I'm not even counting the bailouts that usually favor huge companies. Many farmers are on life support and very few of them are truly independent. All the small resellers have closed up shop a long time ago too.
>>27603>The real problem with capitalism is that it makes people think that arts and crafts are inherently virtuous and essential to society as a career.>but no! art is superfluous and holds no virtue! look at the last thousands of years of useless art and culture the many nations of this planet have created! back then people knew they were pointless and still… huh… bothered with…. them?>wait>>27605Where are we with these Tesla murders by car again?
>>27607>The only way to claim that human consciousness is essentially distinct from AI consciousness is to believe in a soul or somethingOr ponder the source of creativity and inspiration.
>>27614If we get there people will decide to pull the plug and say thank you Ayys but now we need your spart parts.
>>27617>Nah, the abundance of labor created by AI forcing people out of their jobs will uplift some other industryLike what?
>you'll get people just create jobs for the unemployed or self-employ outside of "AI-capitalist" systemProstitution for soup. Specializing in kidnapping people and selling children organs.
How do you create jobs for the mud people when even today we seemingly cannot solve a problem where there are both unemployed people and yet some jobs that are not filled because decent people refuse to be paid with third world wages?
Sorry, not wanting to live in your dystopia scifi movie #12034.
>>27624Fuck yeah he's gonna fix the eggs!
>>28686>analyzing patterns of wordsLet's not exaggerate how new this stuff is. Statistical word analysis was already in use in the last century. A program just counts the words in a referential body of normal text and builds its generic word expectation from that (simple word frequency as well as word couples), then it looks at what kind of difference some documents from some person generate relative to the referential body and then uses that expected difference when looking at documents with an unknown author to see whether it differs from the generic text in a similar way. Very, very simple stuff, especially with English.
>>28687There is more to the world than political shite. There is a lot of decent math and physics stuff on Wikipedia.
>>28670Deepseek has the same problem.
All LLMs are blurry pictures of their reference data. That's the very concept. Chatbots built on that can't reliably multiply two numbers. They can't reliably tell you when a famous person was born, even if the training data contains the correct information.
It is not enough that these programs which run an unreliable fuzzy shitpile as the main thing can call deterministic programs from the inside, like the fuzzy shitpile guessing the user is asking a math question and then calling a deterministic subroutine for that. The better design is a deterministic thing which uses an LLM only as a fallback for user input that does not match anything in the main program. (And actually, old chatbots worked that way. They reacted to patterns in a deterministic fashion, and they used Markov chains as a fallback when user input did not match anything. LLM is just Markov on roids.)
Going tinfoil mode: We have to consider that Facebook and Google can easily bias what texts we see about the supposed quality of LLMs. The very randomness of LLMs can be used to downplay how often LLM-based chatbots fail. Somebody (or something) can just write a reply to any failure complaint that they did not see the wrong response and you just can't know how likely failing the challenge is.
It is trivial to make LLM bots less random in the sense that a conversation starting with the same user input (I don't mean semantically, I mean literally the same key presses) always yields the same result, so you can always replay an old conversation with the same version number of that chatbot. The randomness is not restricted that way and old versions of chatbots become unavailable. The companies try to minimize their liability.
To make people look at the blurry picture instead of the referenced material directly, Google will continue to make the picture's sources harder to access.
>>28717It's been like 5 years and there is no AI killer app that everyone finds indispensable.
Next step will be AI companies popularizing "rent a dev" code generators promising that they will replace all your non-AI application devs, VC morons will push in another 10 trillion for the final product to be a marginally more competent stack overflow post regenerator, some companies who bought these products will hire more managers to "babysit the ai devs" (basically managers will become prompt coolies) and after millions of hours of meetings and "brainstorming" about why our AI strategy is "not delivering value" there will be another bubble pop some C-level hires will retire with stock dumped before the crash, VC bagholders and employee stock plebs will eat the loss, and I don't know what will follow after that.
>>28733…
Have you
ever asked an LLM bot about a topic you already know well? You have to constantly nudge the bot in the right direction, and this appears to work since these bots are virtual yes-men. If you instead play the role of a skeptic about details you know to be true, what happens?
If you know the terms for the concepts you want to know more about, asking the chatbot is dumber than looking up stuff in specialized reference books or even on Wikipedia.
>>28781The people who say AI will replace programmers are the guys in product departments who get really impressed by UX demos but don’t really understand what the backend engineering team is working on.
This has been a consistent issue at every company I’ve worked. The backend will have horrible scaling issues that need to be addressed, but product is constantly roadmapping new “features” that they want prototyped as quickly as possible, so the app just gets shittier as time goes on and the customer is paying millions of dollars for what is effectively a prototype.
What LLMs enable is a future where these mfs can do this at an ever increased rate without the help of an engineering department so if you’re a backend engineer you can look forward to a future of employment where you are brought into to refactor increasingly incomprehensible autogenerated code bases.
AI is good for boilerplate and implementing stuff that you already roughly know what and where you want it. These guys think it’s somehow going to start making overarching architectural decisions like that’s so easy
>>28781>people who really really give a shit should be unionizing and raising living standards for all prolesYes, high wage professionals should embrace collective bargaining.
>coping with the idea that the table will flip on the next boom/bust cycle and demand will spike againMost likely it will. People saying AI is gonna replace IT workers in its current or reasonably extrapolated forms are just fueled by resentment. If a job consists purely of copying and pasting from stack overflow (like a significant chunk of junior positions that have been cut) then yes it's fucked, but IT requires a lot more critical thinking than that.
>>28783>AI is good for boilerplate and implementing stuff that you already roughly know what and where you want it>These guys think it’s somehow going to start making overarching architectural decisions like that’s so easyThis anon actually codes with LLMs.
>>28784>If a job consists purely of copying and pasting from stack overflowThis is pretty much it, what LLMs do. People used to copy and paste code as-is from stack overflow, now they do it from a chatgpt.com response.
Also there are shit-tons of poorly documented overly complex shitpiles like AWS/kubernetes/random niche libraries/etc that have no docs to be fed to an LLM for it to produce relevant copy-pastable output. the best it can do is generate a sample configuration or code which still needs to be modified to fit into a codebase, basically exactly what you get from stack overflow.
this may qualify as """"""AGI"""""" for PHBs, but i don't have to agree with that delusion.
>>27559>"no, we'd prefer if you were replaced, prole, because there if no place for people like you""Blacks Rule" quality writing here
You're not a prole you're selling the product of your labor, not your labor. You're aspiring petit boug
>>28769Lmao what a fucking moron
>>28776They changed the deginition of AGI some time ago to claim to have reached it. They chopped their own leg off.
>>28776>>28790Right. They definition wasn't changed though, it was just never exactly what you would assume.
The definition they chose was that AI was more economically productive than a human. That's it. Not complicated. But understand that to them, this is the sum total of the human being. Humans are simply economic agents, and the human mind is simply an optimization algorithm. It's only natural they see optimization algorithms as humans.
>>28866No, I don't think so. I think it's very clear, with much of the reaction to OpenAI's new product roll out, that AI evangelists really, truly hate artists and genuinely don't understand human beings. The vulgar dehumanization is one of the most insipid bastardizations of Marx, who himself was very passionate about the importance of artistic immersion and expression in the cultivation of the human being, and whose belief in these things ungrided his critique and analysis of political economy.
I think it's poigant and sad because Miyazki, a truly generational artistic mind and a peerless genius, could explain that art and the human soul and expression are deeply and profoundly tied together. Almost all people who express themselves through creative will would understand this intuitively. It seems that only certain people don't understand it– mostly those who don't create anything. Who talk about "democratizing art", when art has in fact been democratized for centuries. They simply do not understand the process.
>>28865You are going to be ruled, instead, by a misanthropic group of people (who possess the same nihilistic and misanthropic outlook embraced by many of the 4chan rejects who ended up posting on forums and or populating SV venture capital firms) who genuinely only see "people" like you useful in so much as they are stupid subjects to be dominated.
You do not have a future. Why should you? What is a single thing about you that is different in any way from an optimization algorithm that predicts the next word in a sentence? Name one thing, just one, that sets you apart.
>>28869we are already ruled by the bourgeois you dumb liberal fuck
>>28868>pretending to be a marxist and bringing up morals and humanismagain, fucking retard
>>28865>Just accept it - you need to adapt to changing technologies or be crushed by them. I think part of the anxiety is that VCs keep blurring the horizon by overselling what these things will be able to do, and by fundamentally misunderstanding what most jobs consists of. So, for programming, they're measuring how good these things are by one-shotting like flying simulators or whatever, but nobody seems to grasp that these projects are easy to conceptualize and have no strict requirements for the end result, whereas most jobs have strict requirements with lots of caveats, and conceptualizing like, i dunno, a payroll system requires knowledge of a lot of quirks that are specific to each business and you need to specify all of them to your LLM, at which point it's irrelevant whether you're writing code yourself or asking the LLM to do it. Most jobs are like this, but these details are abstracted by the time it reaches porky's eyes. Thus they confuse what do their own employees do, and then the LLM isn't able to fit in correctly in your process pipeline. This is part of the reason why they're shoving LLMs into every interface they can get their hands, on they're trying to discover use cases where it can effectively replace people. And I mean, having it be a magic wikipedia that talks back is very cool, I think it's awesome to ask LLMs to do a bunch of ETL shit instead of messing with the actual disgusting python and pandas code, but the valuation is all wrong, LLMs are not replacing a whole lot, except artists that were already jobless to begin with. I hope OpenAI and Anthropic go bankrupt so we can wait for the actual innovators, the chinese, to deliver on LLMs that are increasingly efficient to run, so that we eventually can run the big big models on our local computers and ultra-commoditize this technology. Until that happens all of this is shit.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1904933435803877882.html
>New forensic findings have just been released in the death of Suchir Balaji — a whistleblower against OpenAI.
>Police ruled it a suicide.
>But the evidence just uncovered tells a very different story: drugging, a possible second bullet, and a botched autopsy. 🧵1/ Image>2/ On November 26, 2024, San Francisco PD informed Suchir Balaji’s family he had died by suicide.
>According to the family's attorney, an autopsy was completed just "40 minutes" after arriving at the scene — no interviews, no toxicology report, no ballistic analysis.
>Why? 🤔 Image>3/ This is the last known footage of Suchir Balaji before his death.
>Multiple other CCTV cameras in his apartment complex — including one covering a secondary entrance — were mysteriously disconnected around the time he died. 🤨 Image>4/ Body cam footage shows SFPD officers touching and examining the crime scene without gloves — a blatant breach of protocol.
>They failed to collect fingerprints, left blood-stained evidence unsecured, and one even quipped that the scene looked like a "homicide". Image>5/ When a private autopsy was conducted, it revealed critical evidence the first had completely missed — or ignored.
>First, CT scans showed a second metallic fragment lodged in his skull — in other words, a possible second bullet, which is extremely uncommon in a suicide. Image>6/ The toxicology report raised even more red flags.
>Suchir had a blood alcohol level of 0.178% — well above the legal limit.
>He also had extremely high levels (in excess of 50,000 ng/mL) of GHB in his system, a "date rape" drug commonly used to incapacitate victims. ImageImage
>7/ Based on those reports, Suchir would have been heavily impaired — possibly unconscious — at the time of death.
>Also, the gun found at the scene had no blood, no tissue, no back spatter. His hands didn’t either. For a point-blank shot to the head, that’s virtually impossible. Image>8/ The crime scene also told a different story from the official narrative.
>Rooms were disturbed. Furniture was moved. Blood spatter patterns suggested Suchir had been standing, crawling, and possibly struggling before the fatal shot.
>Does this like a suicide to you? [VIDEO]>9/ There was no suicide note. No history of prior attempts. No recent crisis.
>In fact, Suchir was thriving. He was on the verge of launching his own venture — and had also received numerous job offers offering multi-million dollar salaries. Image>10/ We’re in an AI arms race — and at the center is Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI.
>Suchir Balaji was a whistleblower with info that could disrupt it. Then he turned up dead.
>We need answers. We need accountability. We need justice. >>28874>all this luddite reaction against 'AI' (LLMs, text-to-image models, etc.) is so annoying and it's 99% based on petite-bourgeois complaints on intellectual property which I couldn't care less about, copyright shouldn't existIf copyright didn't exist, we wouldn't have LLM hype. Why are LLMs "hallucinating"? Because they are so fuzzy. Why are they so fuzzy, why can't they properly cite? If they don't obfuscate their sources and just pull out long excerpts from copyrighted material whenever it looks like that's what the user wants, the "AI" companies will get into trouble.
I want LLMs to dial down their randomness (especially around sensitive words like "murder", so they don't constantly crap out false accusations about real people) and in wanting this I am basically asking them to infringe harder.
>>28886They are fuzzy because they are statistical models, not because the companies are afraid of copyright lawsuits. The "hallucinations" will never go away, because that's how LLMs fundamentally work. There is no difference between getting things right and making shit up, one is as accidental as the other.
This is a fundamental issue with LLMs that cannot be solved.
>>28894>They are fuzzy because they are statistical models, not because the companies are afraid of copyright lawsuits.Your argument is the tool just has the properties. But the tool has been chosen again and again while knowing these properties.
>The "hallucinations" will never go away, because that's how LLMs fundamentally work.The point was not about solving everything, but about reducing errors around sensitive topics. In LLMs you can directly set the "temperature" (randomness) of the output.
>>28900That's neither true of AI as a general concept nor of LLMs specifically. DeepSeek shows this.
>>28901The knob for fiddling with output temperature does not require new training. Of course it is feasible to make temperature change during the conversation.
>>29058techcrunch.com/2025/04/22/openai-exec-says-the-company-would-buy-googles-chrome-browser-if-offered-the-chance/
> OpenAI exec says the firm would buy Google’s Chrome browser if offered the chance> An OpenAI exec said during Google’s antitrust trial this week that OpenAI would be interested in buying Google’s Chrome browser if it were made available for sale.> ChatGPT chief Nick Turley said in a court hearing on Tuesday that acquiring Chrome would allow OpenAI to “offer a really incredible experience” and “introduce users into what an AI-first [browser] looks like,” per Bloomberg.> Turley had been called by the Justice Department to testify as part of a trial aimed at determining which business practices Google must modify after a judge ruled the company had monopolized the online search market. The Justice Department has asked that Google be forced to divest Chrome.> OpenAI has reportedly considered working on a web browser to compete with Chrome. The company went so far as to hire ex-Google developers Ben Goodger and Darin Fisher, who worked on the original Chrome project, several months ago.They are going to make Firefox popular again!
>>29431>why does everyone talk about how techbros will use AI to replace artists (despite the overwhelming disdain for AI 'art' atm) but no one talks about how artists can use AI to do coding/programming to create art that required non-art skills prior?That's why the techbros are the maddest of all. They know what's on the horizon.
>>29435>Because when AI makes mistakes with art it just looks wrong, but when it makes mistake with code shit stops working.They can easily make an AI that can test itself. There's a lot of easy improvements they could make with this tech which I'm sure they will do soon enough or might already be out there.
>>29431Probably because AI evangelists show total contempt for art and artists and talk all the time about eliminating them.
AI evangelists loathe human beings and see them as unfortunate and inefficient nodes between multiple efficient computer systems.
But once the AI agents gains the ability to earn money and spend money autonomously, the worth of the human being will collapse to 0. Capital will total rid itself of the human being and replace it completely.
>>29476Moron
Post discarded.
>>29519>>29520>>29522Have a very strong feeling that this bubble will burst.
But the advances made in the means of production will persist.
Did some
vibecoding today with DeepSeek.
It seems decent at making sketches of implementations.
Provided you have an idea of how and what you want.
This program moves the focus to whatever is under the cursor when it moves.
The formatting is awful partly because didn't want to correct the original authors'.https://codeberg.org/jung/ratpoison-sloppymove>>29482Firstly, artistan is not Artist here, but the skilled craftspeople, tailors, jewelers, smiths, etc, who produce boutique goods independently in traditional modes of productions (e.g. guilds).
So not only are these not "artists," you also misunderstand his analysis, which is how it applies to the revolutionary potential of this class broadly (which again, is not "artists", but small manufactures who own a individual amount of property)
The thing that separates them is that they *own property*, albeit at small scale. They are politically inconsistent because they are squeezed by the growth of capitalism. The revolution force is the proletariat who are defined by having no property to lose *in the present*. The proletariat can, and do, produce Art and artists.
I think you further misunderstand, too (calling them "scum") what he says about this class. Which is that they will be forced to abandon their standpoint by the bourgeois, who will destroy and subsume their smaller manufactures, stores, etc. and force them into wage relationships. Their nature is not deceptive or false. but they are politically inconsistent and unreliable, because they are revolutionary only when anticipating the future in which their class position has actually changed and they own no property.
If you want to call everyone scum who does not work as an industrial wage laborer, and claim that laborers also do not produce art, or that desiring to produce art instead of doing wage labor, is counter-revolutionary. Go ahead. lol.
>>29533Turns out when
slopcoding one ends up trying many more iterations and then combining these iterations into a working item. The tricky part is to know how or what you're trying to change so that the machine can hallucinate an interesting iteration. This is in contrast to typical where one would almost needs to know the available options more than anything else. Documentation usage is fairly limited, mostly to find out some bug that the machine introduced rather than to understand. There are exceptions to this rule, for example when trying to use features of a program the machine doesn't have documentation for. It's actually fairly good at doing things like introducing error handling, which may or may not be correct, and simplifying programs. It's very bad at trying to give you source which is nicely refactored out of the box, and can't imagine it making complex architectural choices. Probably the wisest usage would be to provide a pile of functions with relevant usage. This is what my limited experience has taught me so far about
slopcoding.
>>29654Attempted to iterate using slop instead of even look up a proper direction.
Ended up being lead into a very CPU intensive setup with no way out.
Ultimately had to do the same google search should have started with.
It's certainly much better at filling out boilerplate than making decisions.
Even still don't really know if the boilerplate correctly setup the library.
Other than the fact that everything seems to be working now.
Could add one more feature to the program.
So that you have to press and release in the same frame to switch.
Am probably not going to do this however and am going to call it complete.
>>29687A third to a half of the cost is in training and DeepSeek has proven this can be done at about an order of magnitude less.
The problem to me is not only that they don't get their super-profits, but that they might be out-competed long before they get anything like them.
Distilled models (a few billion parameters, as apposed to 700B for DeepSeek (non-linearly scaling)) can even run on your local machine.
Wouldn't be surprised if there were distilled models for specific tasks to reduce costs; even if they remained as SaaS.
This is fairly loose reasoning though one will have to admit.
>>29841This, this is one of my main concerns on top of this being used to gaslight false confessions and create fake evidence for convictions.
LLMs that we all know as generative AI, in spite of all of its ostensible flaws in its current form, are probably some of the most advanced ways that the ruling class have completely blurred the lines between reality and fantasy and completed the usurpation of experience with things artificially representing that experience in its place.
It's a total assault on material reality itself and the human mind's capability to care about it.
>>29841>The bigger issue with this sort of deepfake stuff is that it's eroding people's belief in actual evidence of actual thingsagreed, seen the same trend with some cool art (sculptures especially), where some guys are like "thats AI generated" despite the photos being older than any AI tools
even for cool pictures of improbable things, now its not even "I suspect some photoshopping", because doing good fakes was taking a lot of effort and could almost always be spotted by anyone really bothering to check, so people just assume its AI and dismiss it.
The threat of AI undercapitalism is two-fold:
1. Pareidolia can become so intense it can actually lead to to de-humanization, which affects heavy AI users most readily, and is nearly ubiquitously seen against the technologists in silcon valley. Most of them have already dehumanized themselves, and don't perceive themselves as humans, but as inferior AI. We see patterns and we impose meaning onto them. We see patterns that resemble humans, even in the most superficial and comical way (a smiling faces), and we cannot help but begin to think and feel that what we see is a human. AI, which reflect human intelligence back at humans, trigger this deeply seated tendency to mirror and transfer intention onto something that we can consciously be aware is incapable of possesing such intentionality, but cannot "unsee". This tendency is primordial, and unavoidable. But when decisions about the role of AI in our society is placed into the hands of people utterly deluded by their pareidolia, some to a nearly level of religious zeal, we are in danger.
2. If AI agents can be developed to act as economic units, e.g. a worker, and AI agents can directly compete with humans as economic units (rather than enchaining "productivity" of humans) by being able earn money, save, invest, and spend money autonomously, then they are on the path to outcompeting all human beings on economic efficiency, reducing the value of human beings under captialism to 0.
Refuting both of these requires a politics that is human centric and values human dignity. Unfortunately, many communists these days see this as "humanist" and reject it. So we are all going to be slaughtered. Maybe the Chinese AI will be better utilized.
>>29854> If someone with AI depicted you as a pedophile, murderer, rapist etc.?if you're concerned about someone canceling you, you shouldn't worry since you're not nearly famous enough
if you're concerned about the pigs producing fake evidence of you, you shouldn't worry since the US is undermining due process, "evidence" will be a thing of the past, fake or not
>>29861>calling it reactionary fear (your words)>adamant in denying its just culture war shit>thinks culture war is when queers, and only when queerslol
btw learn to greentext newfag
>Baizuo Communists>"We want gay luxury space communism">Technology comes out that is practically the beginnings of Holodeck level shit (VR/Real time AI generation/Real Time Universal Translator)>"NOOOO NOT LIKE THAT".AI is a overall good and overall good for Socialists, it furthers the technological argument and march towards Socialism. Communism will be powered by fucking AI and predictive models, which make a planned economy easier than fucking ever.
>But muh music.Worked in the music industry for 15 years. Majority of mainstream music is fucking algorithm slop and has been since the 1995, like do you think Sabrina Carpenter songs aren't written by a team of professional shadow producers who scouer through every trend to form patterns then turn those patterns in what is trending into fucking memorized/on paper Algorithms? Kpop in particular has been to a microscope copy-paste algorithm slop for literally 20 years now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ips2mM7Zqwhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nCLBTmjJBYhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APB-AKpnKT4https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTlv5_Bs8awYou can see the same 1:1 pattern, synths, flow etc through all of modern K-pop, and it's largely the same through all modern mainstream music.
Also frankly, if AI can produce stuff that is better than humans, why should I care? If a track is good, it's good. But the reality is, AI will never, ever touch actual creative musicians like say Pink Floyd or Shpongle or Led Zepplin or King Gizzard or Sleep so all AI does is raise the bar and perhaps wipe out completely lazy slop genres like mainstream pop and rap/hip hop.
>But muh art.Digital art is, and has always been, fucking garbage. I mean for nerds, compare old warhammer art to the modern digital art. In fact, one of my hopes for AI is that it can be trained to return texture, and "microscopic" differences in pigments so digital art doesn't look like flat fucking dogshit.
Either way, don't fight against the wind. AI just furthers the argument that Capitalism is retarded, since if a fucking AI does all the functional work, planning, predicting, what is the point of a Capitalist?
>>29879>mainstreamIrrelevant and also not legitamately measurable since the internet, possibly even the cassete tape
>lazy slop genres like (,,,) rap/hip hopPlease learn music theory, and I mean acutally learn it and not just vgh about the simplicity of classical music. That includes jazz, hip hop and EDM's advancements in it. You should be able to write 20 page essay about a Halley Labs album.
Otherwise yes it is easy to bs your way through a profitable music career and AI stands to trim away some of the corpo jobs that enable that. I think the only reason why corps bother with human artists is the parasociality, and now that the internet mogged them so hard in that regard that they'll never catch up, they've got a lot of vestigial idols to liquidate. Eminem and Kanye will both be sent to a farm pretty soon.
>>29881>That includes jazz, hip hop and EDM's advancements in it. I know about advancements in the genre, but modern hip hop/rap is fucking lazy as shit and has been since the early 2010s where the genre should have died in relevance as the fad it was like Pop punk or Electro House.
The genre is pushed heavily by the industry because
1: Zoomers and late millennials worship black people and black culture and think anything black people do is "cool" and instantly has underground cred. hence for example why anime was cringe for losers, but as soon as black influencers starting unveiling power level, now every zoomer, even women, larp as hentai loving weebs. Tracks that would be seen as fucking lazy as fuck, from white artists are suddenly "The greatest lyricist of all time" if from a black artist. (coughkaynecouglamar)
2: It's cheap as fuck, and lazy as fuck to make, and you have a billion soundcloud tryhards with garage band level tracks that you can pick and choose from that the mainstream will eat up.
There are far, FAR more artists deserving of mainsteam success than 99.999% of successful mainstream artists today, and frankly, if this was the 70s, 80s or early-mid 1990s, a lot of them probably would be successful and most of the mainstream pop artists of now would be one hit wonders.
>>29882>died in relevanceWhat, like an influencer losing relevance? We're talking about a music genre. This is like saying an ingredient dying in relevance because recipes use it less frequently.
>generationpolMarketing brain
>black people are why anime stopped being cringe and not the end of cringe culture in generalAre you a minor or do you just live under a rock? Why would something persist to be cringe long after cringe culture ended?
>larp as hentai loving weebsWhich youtubers are you calling out here specifically?
>mainstream (demographic)Terminal marketing brain.
Unique IPs: 188