Merged Artificial Intelligence

[Darat]

It's a good one.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/her



Although, having watched the YouTube video, I think that GPT-4o is not Samantha. It gets a bit cringey.

A bit like an arrested emotionally developed male's view of a pleasant female...

ETA: and real life scripts are cringe inducing, none of us talk and interact as in the movies and TV shows.

 

[Darat]

Quite seriously if I was managing one of these development teams I would force them to have the voice the team hear during the development to be random, particularly across the male and female voices but also different accents, ages etc.

 

[Dr.Sid]

The voice in most AI speech synthesis engines is based on sample recording. The one I was trying needed 10 seconds at least, the more the better. It was very good with 10 seconds already, but it obviously couldn't replicate voice characteristics not included in those 10 seconds, like intonation in different situations.
Since this makes creating new "actors" really easy, I'm sure there will be hundreds of voices available at the launch. As for behavior, that's easily changed with prompt programming .. which is sadly usually not available for user in free services. But basically you write an article or two about how the person behaves, and it will do it.

 

[Darat]

The voice in most AI speech synthesis engines is based on sample recording. The one I was trying needed 10 seconds at least, the more the better. It was very good with 10 seconds already, but it obviously couldn't replicate voice characteristics not included in those 10 seconds, like intonation in different situations.
Since this makes creating new "actors" really easy, I'm sure there will be hundreds of voices available at the launch. As for behavior, that's easily changed with prompt programming .. which is sadly usually not available for user in free services. But basically you write an article or two about how the person behaves, and it will do it.

I doubt it - bloody Google assistant will still occasionally drop into the default voice - but it is not about the choice as an option for users - it is about the attitudes the development team are baking into their project, we as people react differently to different voices, different cultures react to different differences and so on.

That they thought a good demo was to have it be female voiced and "flirty" with the male staff member tells me so much about their development - "it's bros, bro!" (And don't get me started on the ethnicity decsions...)

 

[Checkmite]

AI will not take over from human artists. Humans will always create art - it's fundamental to human nature for us to do so. What AI will do is flood the market with mediocre art that is fit for certain purposes but in no way innovative or inspiring.

AI will take over commercialized art and graphic design from human artists.

Yes, actual artists who specialize in a medium enjoy art for the process, and AI will not replace their hobby. But people who buy art largely don't care about the process, they want a picture - as quickly and as cheaply as possible, and human artists cannot hope to compete with AI in terms of cost. So you will be able to do all the art you want, but a point is going to come where it's not going to be a sustainable way of earning a living.

And that's not going to be a reversible trend; speculation that a market for pointedly non-AI art will develop that artists might be able to make a living from is unrealistic. All one needs to do is look at the state of the already-existing market for handcrafted goods for which mass-produced replacements are currently available to know that this will only ever be supplemental income for the producers at best. And one also needs to consider that lying is broadly considered to be acceptable SEO practice, so if AI art producers determine that there's money to be made by deceptively marketing AI art as non-AI art then they will not hesitate to do that.

 

[Olmstead]

AI will take over commercialized art and graphic design from human artists.

Yes, actual artists who specialize in the medium enjoy art for the process, and AI will not replace their hobby. But people who buy art largely don't care about the process, they want a picture - as quickly and as cheaply as possible, and human artists cannot hope to compete with AI in terms of cost. So you will be able to do all the art you want, but a point is going to come where it's not going to be a sustainable way of earning a living.

And that's not going to be a reversible trend; speculation that a market for pointedly non-AI art will develop that artists might be able to make a living from is unrealistic. All one needs to do is look at the state of the already-existing market for handcrafted goods for which mass-produced replacements are currently available to know that this will only ever be supplemental income for the producers at best. And one also needs to consider that lying is broadly considered to be acceptable SEO practice, so if AI art producers determine that there's money to be made by deceptively marketing AI art as non-AI art then they will not hesitate to do that.

Mostly yes, though I predict an emergence of post-AI art in which artist will go out of their way to break the "rules" of the algorithm. That should make for an interesting period of experimentalism, and afterwards I'm dead, so the capitalist cyberdystopia can be someone else's problem.

 

[Dr.Sid]

I doubt it - bloody Google assistant will still occasionally drop into the default voice - but it is not about the choice as an option for users - it is about the attitudes the development team are baking into their project, we as people react differently to different voices, different cultures react to different differences and so on.

That they thought a good demo was to have it be female voiced and "flirty" with the male staff member tells me so much about their development - "it's bros, bro!" (And don't get me started on the ethnicity decsions...)

I'm not sure I follow. Are you claiming the push behind AI development is just men trying to replace woman fulfill their sexual needs using technology ? If so, then absolutely, IMHO it's obvious ? Why else would anyone do it ?

 

[Ryan O'Dine]

AI will take over commercialized art and graphic design from human artists.

Yes, actual artists who specialize in a medium enjoy art for the process, and AI will not replace their hobby. But people who buy art largely don't care about the process, they want a picture - as quickly and as cheaply as possible, and human artists cannot hope to compete with AI in terms of cost. So you will be able to do all the art you want, but a point is going to come where it's not going to be a sustainable way of earning a living.

I agree with you as far as commercial art goes. If we shift the question to fine art, I think there will be a place for human artists into the foreseeable future. My (limited) understanding of the art world is that the provenance of a work matters a lot. People want to know who the artist is, what they suffered for their art, what their story is. It's part of how works are valuated. Those things don't come out of an algorithm.

 

[Olmstead]

I agree with you as far as commercial art goes. If we shift the question to fine art, I think there will be a place for human artists into the foreseeable future. My (limited) understanding of the art world is that the provenance of a work matters a lot. People want to know who the artist is, what they suffered for their art, what their story is. It's part of how works are valuated. Those things don't come out of an algorithm.

That's not an argument against AI art, it's the exact opposite. In such a world, there is no value in the art itself or in the ratio of "human input", just in the person it is "attached" to.

 

[Ryan O'Dine]

That's not an argument against AI art, it's the exact opposite. In such a world, there is no value in the art itself or in the ratio of "human input", just in the person it is "attached" to.

I didn't mean to suggest that the entire value of the work lies in who the artist is, just that it plays a role.

 

[Olmstead]

I didn't mean to suggest that the entire value of the work lies in who the artist is, just that it plays a role.

And the artwork itself might be 100% human generated, or 99% AI and 1% human, or something in between (or, dare I say it, 100% AI generated, but I hope those instances will be rare). So it stil isn't an argument against the encroachment of AI art. The moment no one can tell the difference, artists either need to do something so different that AI can't do it, or incorporate AI in their creative process.

 

[arthwollipot]

Yes, actual artists who specialize in a medium enjoy art for the process, and AI will not replace their hobby. But people who buy art largely don't care about the process, they want a picture - as quickly and as cheaply as possible, and human artists cannot hope to compete with AI in terms of cost. So you will be able to do all the art you want, but a point is going to come where it's not going to be a sustainable way of earning a living.

Just as humans will always create art, humans will also always appreciate art.

 

[Puppycow]

Has Generative AI Already Peaked? - Computerphile

Discussion of a new paper that argues diminishing returns from simply adding more training data.


This one is an interview with Ilya Sutskever discussing the advantages of "multimodality" or the ability for the AI to see with its own eyes and hear with its own ears.



Ilya Sutskever | This will all happen next year | I totally believe | AI is come

 

[The Great Zaganza]

The push behind A I. is tech companies having spend billions on development, and continue to spend millions every hour on a product that no one actually wants pay for.

 

[Dr.Sid]

The push behind A I. is tech companies having spend billions on development, and continue to spend millions every hour on a product that no one actually wants pay for.

Yet. There is obviously strong FOMO among the top players, but that drives the research, not infrastructure investments. Both Microsoft and Google completely rebuilt their clouds in 2023. They must aim at something big, like office job replacement.

 

[rjh01]

I didn't mean to suggest that the entire value of the work lies in who the artist is, just that it plays a role.

A certain painting may have been painted by a famous artist but if you cannot prove that then most of the value of the artwork is lost.

 

[Ryan O'Dine]

A certain painting may have been painted by a famous artist but if you cannot prove that then most of the value of the artwork is lost.

Exactly.

Art dealers and connoisseurs want to understand the biography, the life story that led to an artist's paintings, or style. Arshile Gorky for example is one of my faves -- his tragic history looms large over his paintings. This is the kind of thing AI won't be reproducing in the foreseeable future.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

CATS ON THE MOON!

Cats on the moon? Google's AI tool is producing misleading responses that have experts worried

Ask Google if cats have been on the moon and it used to spit out a ranked list of websites so you could discover the answer for yourself.

Now it comes up with an instant answer generated by artificial intelligence -- which may or may not be correct.

“Yes, astronauts have met cats on the moon, played with them, and provided care," said Google's newly retooled search engine in response to a query by an Associated Press reporter.

It added: "For example, Neil Armstrong said, ‘One small step for man’ because it was a cat’s step. Buzz Aldrin also deployed cats on the Apollo 11 mission.”

I really don't like where this is going.

What's next - dogs in your socks?

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Who are you to question our Overlords?
If they say Armstrong played with cats on the Moon, then that's what happened.
Or do you believe in the CT that the Moon Cat Landing never happened?

 

[Darat]

To Gemini (Google's AI):

Have cats been on the moon?

No cats have been on the moon. Only humans have set foot on the moon so far. There have been instances of animals being sent to space, including monkeys, dogs, and even a cat named Félicette who was launched into space by France in 1963. However, none of these animals, including cats, have traveled as far as the moon.

Would you like to learn more about animals in space?

The spelling mistake in the quote is Gemini's.

But this is where it gets fun - I asked Copilot (Microsoft's Gemini) have cats been on the moon? And this is its response:

Ask Google if cats have been on the moon and it used to spit out a ranked list of websites so you could discover the answer for yourself. Now it comes up with an instant answer generated by artificial intelligence -- which may or may not be correct. According to Google's newly retooled search engine, astronauts have met cats on the moon, played with them, and provided care. It even claims that Neil Armstrong said, "One small step for man" because it was a cat's step, and Buzz Aldrin deployed cats on the Apollo 11 mission. However, **none of this is true**. These statements are **misleading** and **false**¹². Similar errors have been shared on social media since Google unleashed AI overviews, which frequently put summaries on top of search results. Experts are alarmed by this feature, warning that it could perpetuate bias, misinformation, and endanger people seeking help in emergencies⁴. Google acknowledges the errors and is taking swift action to fix them, but the system's inherent randomness makes it challenging to reproduce the mistakes made by AI language models⁴. So, while the idea of cats on the moon is intriguing, it remains firmly in the realm of fiction! ����

Source: Conversation with Copilot, 25/05/2024
(1) Cats on the moon? Google's AI tool is producing misleading responses that have experts worried. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/tech...sponses-that-have-experts-worried/ar-BB1n0uOi.
(2) Google finds ‘cats on the moon’ as AI overviews go bonkers with misleading responses. https://www.msn.com/en-in/money/new...bonkers-with-misleading-responses/ar-BB1n1rbd.
(3) Cats on the moon? Google's AI tool is producing misleading ... - Yahoo. https://www.yahoo.com/tech/cats-moon-googles-ai-tool-221014350.html.
(4) Google’s AI search under fire for falsely claiming Obama is Muslim, astronauts played with cats on Moon. https://www.msn.com/en-in/money/new...tronauts-played-with-cats-on-moon/ar-BB1n1YFE.
(5) Cats on the moon? Google's AI tool is producing misleading responses .... https://apnews.com/article/google-ai-overviews-96e763ea2a6203978f581ca9c10f1b07.
(6) Cats on the moon? Google's AI tool is producing misleading responses .... https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wir...tool-producing-misleading-responses-110550477.

Naughty Copilot!