• redwattlebird
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Art can be automated, nature does it all the time.

    Ok, first off: what is your definition of automation? This is what I mean when I say automation.

    Nature does not automate art. Are you equating the process of, say, almost all bower birds make bowers, therefore that’s automation? Then you have a poor understanding of what automation, art, and therefore AI/LLM, is meant to achieve.

    With art, you need to think about the state of mind to create that piece in the first place. Before it was created, it doesn’t exist in any capacity. Why the art piece exists in the first place is the reason why AI cannot automate it because human emotions are very complex.

    If an AI/LLM can experience human emotions, we’ve essentially created another type of human. This is deeply profound and, with the technology and materials we have now (that is, the processing chips and hardware), it is simply not possible. We’re at the point where we’re making small, tiny leaps in gains.

    Which leads me to…

    It’s a prototype, but its also a hardware issue. Soon there will be much more efficient designs and i suspect a rather significant alteration to the architecture of the network that may allow for massively improved efficiency.

    It is not a software/coding issue that limits an LLM’s capability to emulate the human psyche. Again, it is not tweaks in code structure that will send us rocketing up the graph of progress. It is the limitation of the actual materials that we use and their maximum efficacy, hence why we need nuclear reactors and so on to power thousands of processors. We will never get to the point of replicating human ability and energy efficiency with the materials that exist in Earth. And, are we going to spend more energy and resources to look to the stars for a material that may or may not exist to create a machine that has the capability to think as a human?

    How long did humans take to evolve to the capacity we have? That took hundreds and thousands of years of trial and error. But I digress…

    Its inherit to capitalism.

    Absolutely agree. The whole purpose of this ‘AI boom’ is to make more money for the <1%, steal from us and hoard it for themselves. On this basis, I completely reject the use of LLMs. Fuck AI.

    • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      we will never get to the point of replicating human ability and energy efficiency with the materials that exist in Earth

      That is flatly incorrect. There is a type of ai that is literally just replicating the human mind, hardware and all. That is well within our current technology, although the connections would not be the same as it would merely be a clone. But a cloned human is an artificial intelligence.

      I know that form of ai is not what you are referring to, but why not? What is it about ai that makes it impossible to replicate in a metallic substrate? And even assuming a metallic substrate is flatly impossible, that still doesnt stop progress. There are youtubers currently working of making an artifical rat brain in a jar play doom. This is not a piece of a living rat, these are rat neurons grown from stem cells that were converted from skin cells. So we could just as easily start progress down physical ai’s.

      As for evolution, that was millions of years of random chance, the difference between that and guided evolution is too great to even compare. And the materials came from Earth in the first place. The entire idea of ai is based around replicating what nature did in the first place, thats how all our technologies are made. People said it was impossible for people to fly merely a decade before the wright brothers. The only difference now is that there is no material scientist on earth that claims wed have to go to outer space to replicate the hardware neccassary for ai.

      Edit: forgot about the first part of your comment. this should largely cover that

      • redwattlebird
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        But a cloned human is an artificial intelligence.

        No, it’s not. Artificial intelligence is something that is artificially created, like a machine, that can think like a human. A human clone is human, literally.

        I think we’re both standing from extremely different points of view here on what AI, that is artificial intelligence actually is. But I concede that my statement about it being impossible to create is hyperbolic. We’re can’t say for certain that it’s impossible.

        I know that form of ai is not what you are referring to, but why not?

        … Because… It’s wrong.

        I wouldn’t call investing power and resources to replicate human capability progress. It’s literally going backwards and rebuilding from scratch. Is this line of research honestly worth pursuing at the cost of our climate and environment? It’s the same with the Wright Brothers; their technology paved way for increased consumption of resources and rate of spread of disease.

        Yeah we get brand new shiny things but at what cost? Is it worth it in the long run? Is it worth automating human capability when we’ve messed up every single step of our planetary ecosystem?

        I would much rather live in a world where all the effort and resources that is currently put into ‘AI’ redirected into sustainable systems. That, to me, is progress that is worth pursuing.