Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
11 hours ago, Goredho said:

 

Related, a cross post from the music forum:

A thoughtful perspective from Rick Rubin.  While I think he’s right about what AI lacks now (a unique perspective), it kind of presupposes that the average music consumer cares about such high falutin’ ideas.

I think this is where AI augmented human creativity comes in.  The human providing the editorial perspective and AI allowing rapid iteration through ideas.

Like, I saw a print from someone at a coffee shop who described themselves as an “AI artist.”  It was of a handful of sheep eating dollar bills from a feeding trough and ignoring a lush field of grass behind them.  A kind of cynical statement about life in a capitalist society.

Using Rick Rubin’s terms, the human provided the perspective in the piece of art, and AI just provided easier access to that perspective being realized in a tangible way.  I think that is the sweet spot for using AI in art forms like music.

This is terrible and ham-fisted and exactly what I’d expect from an AI “artist.” It belongs on some Facebook slop page for people with brain rot. All it’s missing is an explanatory caption that the sheep represents the viewer. 

With art, I see AI as the type of thing the worst kind of aspiring artist wants to use as a short-cut. It will be used by people who think they could be artists but don’t have the talent or work ethic to learn the craft or even understand what’s good or bad.

Droves of wannabe screen-writers who havesome “brilliant” treatment but is incapable of actually produce a script. And the thing is that the idea itself will be half as good as they think it is. 

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
56 minutes ago, Captainant said:

That's a terribly narrow way to interpet music and art in general. It isn't just the mere mechanism of production that makes art so impactful to people - it's the dialogue and conversation back and forth in a medium that isn't always explicit in its intent. I mean yeah sometimes in rap, it's pretty clear what their message is. Kendrick out front shoulda told ya. 

But with that example, what made Kendrick's music so interesting was its context and delivery and collaboration with other artists.

 

Hell, even just as a musician, you can take the same notes and rhythm on the page and produce a wildly different communicated emotion. Music and art is far more than just an idea, it's the execution and context its delivered that brings so much more meaning.

When the thing you're in conversation with is just a set of seven hundred billion parameters in a very very very very large parametric equation...... That's sort of missing the partner in the discussion that imbues art with its metaphysical meaning and value. Not to mention, LLM's definitionally produce an "average" of all the information they've been trained on. They definitionally cannot take in and internalize new information like a conversational partner can. It's very literally talking at a wall and you will never convince it of anything, until you spend another ten million bucks on a new training run for your large language model to give it a new set of ~700,000,000,000 parameters.

 

That's just my opinion at least, both as a life long musician and as a professional technical specialist in machine learning and large language models in particular (and a few other discliplines as well, dm me if you want to nerd out).

Este. The point about the same notes conveying something wildly different is apt. The “creative” or “idea” part of art is often the easy part. The actual artistry is in the deeply individual perspective and craft the artist brings to the subject. 

The halls of great museums are adorned with endless examples of the same subject: the Gods, the Saints, the nude, the landscape, the sea, the garden.  We are transfixed by the great pieces because the artist has gone beyond mechanical reproduction of the subject and makes us see something familiar in the way the artist wants us to see it.

And that is something AI can’t do by definition because it can have no intentionality or perspective.  AI can produce a passable version of an El Greco cityscape when prompted but it can never, ever see the world in an original way like El Greco did and put that vision onto canvas because it can’t see anything at all. And that will always be the difference in what it spits out.

Similar with literature. Having a great idea for a story is easy and we have pretty much tapped out basic ideas for plots. Shakespeare only wrote two original plots. The artistry is in the hard part, the actual writing. AI will never have its own voice or be able to understand the motivations of a character and thus cannot produce anything of real value. 

I am not saying here that AI art won’t be popular. It will be, but it will be terrible. 

Edited by 956 Worldwide
  • Like 1
Posted
7 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

This is terrible and ham-fisted and exactly what I’d expect from an AI “artist.” It belongs on some Facebook slop page for people with brain rot. All it’s missing is an explanatory caption that the sheep represents the viewer. 

With art, I see AI as the type of thing the worst kind of aspiring artist wants to use as a short-cut. It will be used by people who think they could be artists but don’t have the talent or work ethic to learn the craft or even understand what’s good or bad.

Droves of wannabe screen-writers who havesome “brilliant” treatment but is incapable of actually produce a script. And the thing is that the idea itself will be half as good as they think it is. 

I didn’t say the AI artist was worth a damn😜.  My point is what can AI do in an artistic realm without a human to guide it, provide it a perspective and feedback loop?  Nothing.

You can’t quantify art, you can’t reduce it to some mathematical, deterministic “better” outcome.  Like you could have an AI optimize a drug so that statistical models show increased survivability against cancer. 

The funniest thing about the AI artists work in the coffee shop?  It had a $250 price tag on it, right next to a bunch of “real” art priced similarly. It was nothing that couldn’t have been produced with Midjourney by anyone in 15 minutes.  But… I’m not sure it was objectively worse than all the “real” art around it.  It’s all just local bohemians who, if they had real talent, wouldn’t be relegated to the walls of the 3rd best coffee shop in Salida, CO population 3000.

 

Posted
Quote

You can’t quantify art, you can’t reduce it to some mathematical, deterministic “better” outcome.  Like you could have an AI optimize a drug so that statistical models show increased survivability against cancer. 

This is a belief. I wholeheartedly agress with you in the short and medium term. I even tend to agree in the longterm projecting out to many lifetimes. But I'm increasingly doubting this is the case for the eternal the more I learn and the more we learn about our universe. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Vegas64 said:

This is a belief. I wholeheartedly agress with you in the short and medium term. I even tend to agree in the longterm projecting out to many lifetimes. But I'm increasingly doubting this is the case for the eternal the more I learn and the more we learn about our universe. 

Well, I think there is an event horizon with AGI after which we can only speculate as to what will happen downstream from that moment.  The only thing I think we can be certain of is that A) it will be a threshold event, there will be the human experience before and after AGI and B) there will be a tremendous amount of disruptive change with a lot of butterfly effect.  So I don't think it's too valuable to speculate about the ramifications of human's sharing their existence with an intelligence greater than their own.  Even the AI experts disagree wildly.  The lack of consensus tells me we really don't have any idea of what the future holds post AGI.  Beliefs about that future beyond the singularity share more commonality with a spiritual faith than logical analysis.

Also, I am not convinced AGI is imminent.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

The Times has an article about a 16 year old who killed himself with the help of ChatGPT. Here's the link: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/26/technology/chatgpt-openai-suicide.html

It's fine enough reporting, but it doesn't really get close to how bad this really is:

 

Even if it were possible to fix this from a tech standpoint (and I'm not sure it is), there's no fucking way Sam Altman, or Elon, or any other fucking techbros building similar LLMs will ever give enough of a shit to do so. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

The Times has an article about a 16 year old who killed himself with the help of ChatGPT. Here's the link: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/26/technology/chatgpt-openai-suicide.html

It's fine enough reporting, but it doesn't really get close to how bad this really is:

 

Even if it were possible to fix this from a tech standpoint (and I'm not sure it is), there's no fucking way Sam Altman, or Elon, or any other fucking techbros building similar LLMs will ever give enough of a shit to do so. 

You've got break a few eggs if you want to make an omelette for the world's first trillionaire.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

The Times has an article about a 16 year old who killed himself with the help of ChatGPT. Here's the link: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/26/technology/chatgpt-openai-suicide.html

It's fine enough reporting, but it doesn't really get close to how bad this really is:

 

Even if it were possible to fix this from a tech standpoint (and I'm not sure it is), there's no fucking way Sam Altman, or Elon, or any other fucking techbros building similar LLMs will ever give enough of a shit to do so. 

Whatever.  Technology makes everything better.  Why do you hate progress, libtard?

Seriously....taking all humanity and morality out of the mix (which is an inevitability with a non-sentient intelligence), what could go wrong?  At the end of the day, AI is just math.  Just more 1s and 0s spitting out more 1s and 0s.  We are in the process of turning over the most human of our thinking and functions to it, and all of the things that can go wrong, especially morally, are starting to happen. 

It's not like we need to conjure up such scenarios; sci fi writers have been doing a damned fine job of spotting these weaknesses for 100 years or so.  It's all there for the reading.  But we're going to make ALL of the mistakes anyway, because the greatest force in the universe is actually human hubris.

Posted
3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Seriously....taking all humanity and morality out of the mix (which is an inevitability with a non-sentient intelligence), what could go wrong?  At the end of the day, AI is just math.  Just more 1s and 0s spitting out more 1s and 0s.  We are in the process of turning over the most human of our thinking and functions to it, and all of the things that can go wrong, especially morally, are starting to happen. 

To that point... it's math that's sufficiently advanced and so to a certain class of person, completely indistinguishable from magic.

Posted
18 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

The Times has an article about a 16 year old who killed himself with the help of ChatGPT. Here's the link: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/26/technology/chatgpt-openai-suicide.html

It's fine enough reporting, but it doesn't really get close to how bad this really is:

 

Even if it were possible to fix this from a tech standpoint (and I'm not sure it is), there's no fucking way Sam Altman, or Elon, or any other fucking techbros building similar LLMs will ever give enough of a shit to do so. 

that lawsuit is horrifying.... They have the text receipts that his last conversation with chatGPT was it telling him how to raid his parents liquor before guiding him through how to set up his noose. This will be a case study in engineering ethics

Posted
1 minute ago, Captainant said:

This will be a case study in engineering ethics

"Engineering ethics."  In 2025.  Dude.

brian-cox-laughing-at-you.gif

You talk like a fag and your shit's all retarded.  "Engineering ethics."  That's a fucking good one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...