• 0 Posts
  • 13 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle

  • I see intelligence as filling areas of concept space within an econiche in a way that proves functional for actions within that space. I think we are discovering more that “nature” has little commitment, and is just optimizing preparedness for expected levels of entropy within the functional eco-niche.

    Most people haven’t even started paying attention to distributed systems building shared enactive models, but they are already capable of things that should be considered groundbreaking considering the time and finances of development.

    That being said, localized narrow generative models are just building large individual models of predictive process that doesn’t by default actively update information.

    People who attack AI for just being prediction machines really need to look into predictive processing, or learn how much we organics just guess and confabulate ontop of vestigial social priors.

    But no, corpos are using it so computer bad human good, even though the main issue here is the humans that have unlimited power and are encouraged into bad actions due to flawed social posturing systems and the confabulating of wealth with competency.


  • While I agree about the conflict of interest, I would largely say the same thing despite no such conflict of interest. However I see intelligence as a modular and many dimensional concept. If it scales as anticipated, it will still need to be organized into different forms of informational or computational flow for anything resembling an actively intelligent system.

    On that note, the recent developments with active inference like RXinfer are astonishing given the current level of attention being paid. Seeing how llms are being treated, I’m almost glad it’s not being absorbed into the hype and hate cycle.


  • As always, the problem is our economic system that has funneled every gain and advance to the benefit of the few. The speed of this change will make it impossible to ignore the need for a new system. If it wasn’t for AI, we would just boil the frog like always. But let’s remember the real issue.

    If a free food generating machine is seen as evil for taking jobs, the free food machine wouldn’t be the issue. Stop protesting AI, start protesting affluent society. We would still be suffering under them even if we had destroyed the loom.



  • Perhaps instead we could just restructure our epistemically confabulated reality in a way that doesn’t inevitably lead to unnecessary conflict due to diverging models that haven’t grown the necessary priors to peacefully allow comprehension and the ability exist simultaneously.

    breath

    We are finally coming to comprehend how our brains work, and how intelligent systems generally work at any scale, in any ecosystem. Subconsciously enacted social systems included.

    We’re seeing developments that make me extremely optimistic, even if everything else is currently on fire. We just need a few more years without self focused turds blowing up the world.


  • Peanut@sopuli.xyztoTechnology@lemmy.worldGenerative A.I - We Aren’t Ready.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    AI or no AI, the solution needs to be social restructuring. People underestimate the amount society can actively change, because the current system is a self sustaining set of bubbles that have naturally grown resilient to perturbations.

    The few people who actually care to solve the world’s problems are figuring out how our current systems inevitably fail, and how to avoid these outcomes.

    However, the best bet for restructuring would be a distributed intelligent agent system. I could get into recent papers on confirmation bias, and the confabulatory nature of thought, on the personal level, group level, and society level.

    Turns out we are too good at going with the flow, even when the structure we are standing on is built over highly entrenched vestigial confabulations that no longer help.

    Words, concepts, and meanings change heavily depending on the model interpreting them. The more divergent, the more difficulty in bridging this communication gap.

    a distributed intelligent system could not only enable a complete social restructuring with autonomy and altruism both guaranteed, but with an overarching connection between the different models at every scale, capable of properly interpreting the different views, and conveying them more accurately than we could have ever managed with model projection and the empathy barrier.


  • The main issue though is the economic system, not the technology.

    My hope is that it shakes things up fast enough that they can’t boil the frog, and something actually changes.

    Having capable AI is a more blatantly valid excuse to demand a change in economic balance and redistribution. The only alternative would be destroy all technology and return to monkey. Id rather we just fix the system so that technological advancements don’t seem negative because the wealthy have already hoarded all new gains of every new technology for this past handful of decades.

    Such power is discretely weaponized through propaganda, influencing, and economic reorganizing to ensure the equilibrium stays until the world is burned to ash, in sacrifice to the lifestyle of the confidently selfish.

    I mean, we could have just rejected the loom. I don’t think we’d actually be better off, but I believe some of the technological gain should have been less hoardable by existing elite. Almost like they used wealth to prevent any gains from slipping away to the poor. Fixing the issue before it was this bad was the proper answer. Now people don’t even want to consider that option, or say it’s too difficult so we should just destroy the loom.

    There is a markov blanket around the perpetuating lifestyle of modern aristocrats, obviously capable of surviving every perturbation. every gain as a society has made that reality more true entirely due to the direction of where new power is distributed. People are afraid of AI turning into a paperclip maximizer, but that’s already what happened to our abstracted social reality. Maximums being maximized and minimums being minimized in the complex chaotic system of billions of people leads to inevitable increase to accumulation of power and wealth wherever it has already been gathered. Unless we can dissolve the political and social barrier maintaining this trend, it we will be stuck with our suffering regardless of whether we develop new technology or don’t.

    Although doesn’t really matter where you are or what system you’re in right now. Odds are there is a set of rich asshole’s working as hard as possible to see you are kept from any piece of the pie that would destabilize the status quo.

    I’m hoping AI is drastic enough that the actual problem isn’t ignored.




  • I definitely agree that copyright is a good half century in need of an update. Disney company and other contemporaries should never have been allowed the dominance and extension of copywrite that allows what feels like ownership of most global artistic output. They don’t need AI, they have the money and interns to create whatever boardroom adjusted art they need to continue their dominance.

    Honestly I think the faster AI happens, the more likely it is that we find a way out of the social and economical hierarchical structure that feels one step from anarcho-capitalistic aristocracy.

    I just hope we can find the change without riots.


  • Peanut@sopuli.xyztoTechnology@lemmy.worldGenerative AI Has a Visual Plagiarism Problem
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    And you violate copyright when you think about copywritten things alone at night.

    I violate copyright when i draw Mario and don’t sell it to anybody.

    Or these are dumb stretches of what copyright is and how it should be applied.

    the reasoning in this article is dumb and all over the place.

    Seems like gary marcus being gary marcus.

    Already seen openAI calling out some of the bullshit specifically noted in this. That doesn’t matter though, damage is done and people WANT to believe ai is terrible in every way.

    Everyone is just deadfast determined to climb onto the gary marcus unreasonable AI hate train no matter what.


  • I believe it will require a level and pace of informational processing that is far beyond what humans will accomplish alone. just having a system that can efficiently sift through the excess existing papers, and find correlations or contradictions would be amazing for development of new technology. if you are paying attention to any environmental sciences right now, it’s terrifying in an extremely real and tangible way. we will not outpace the collapse without an intense increase in technological development.

    if we bridge the gap of analogical comprehension in these systems, they could also start introducing or suggesting technologies that could help slow down or reverse the collapse. i think this is much more important than making sure sarah silverman doesn’t have her work paraphrased.


  • Personally I find this stupid. If we have robots walking around, are they going to be sued every time they see something that’s copywrited?

    It’s this what will stop progress that could save us from environmental collapse? That a robot could summarize your shitty comedy?

    Copywrite is already a disgusting mess, and still nobody cares about models being created specifically to manipulate people en mass. “What if it learned from MY creations” asks every self obsessed egoist in the world.

    Doesn’t matter how many people this tech could save after another decade of development. Somebody think of the [lucky few artists that had the connections and luck to make a lot of money despite living in our soul crushing machine of a world]

    All of the children growing up abused and in pain with no escape don’t matter at all. People who are sick or starving or homeless do no matter. Making progress to save the world from immanent environmental disaster doesn’t matter. Let Canada burn more and more every year. As long as copywrite is protected, all is well.