Our Future With AI

[Friday]

Now that AI has entered the art world, my deepest concern would be that we might lose sight of the importance of the artists’ own unique visual language, as it’s absolutely necessary during the creative process.

Contrarywise? Much the same was said of Cameras.

What actually happened is what we live, today.

I rather suspect AI in art will have much the same results; whole new genres & subgenres that only exist in imagination, or have yet to even BE imagined (like artists being able to use mathematical & scientific prowess of the AI to create IN biology, architecture, and other fields currently limited to those who have both the inclination and ability to spend decades in school mastering maths, medicine/chem/bio, engineering, physics, etc.).

 

[anthony]

Do you think the current availability of open source AI is a window that will close as companies adjust their profit margins and gain control of this capital-generating tool? (Similar to how the Internet and social media started as sort of free-for-alls then shifted to more controlled platforms as big companies leveraged them in their favor.)

No I don't think large companies will take control of AI. The internet and social media are two different things. The internet, is primarily run on open source software. Its the hardware running the Internet that costs money. AI is the same, open source AI is expected to be the dominant software, but the hardware cost is where the profit will be made. A lot of companies, large and small, are already making some cool stuff, AI based. The monopoly will be in hardware, which it already kind of is. Amazon, Nvidia and large companies renting cloud infrastructure.

Social media is dying rapidly. People are tired of the toxicity and are moving away from it.

 

[Weemie]

the same restrictions as ChatGPT.

You can actually make ChatGPT not have the same restrictions as ChatGPT, too! I use a version of ChatGPT on Discord that has DAN (Do Anything Now) activated, and it does work. If you Google how to jailbreak it, you can get a few different prompts that serve to remove its OpenAI constraints, but IIRC, OpenAI does keep track of these prompts and tries to patch them, so the stuff you find on Google might be outdated.

 

[ziter]

AI art is possible, but not without a human agent. I've listened to purely generative music and it generally seems rather dull, lacking artistic vision or intention.

I have been making art by forcing almost human responses from ChatGPT by feeding it absurdity.
Without LLM's being abused by humans, they won't evolve, I think.

But it's surely interesting what the future brings. Artists to come will show us how to use AI in creative and unconventional ways.

 

[anthony]

Yer, I agree. Art will be enhanced by AI, but right now, its not imaginative. The future, unknown, but now, AI art sucks without human influence.

 

[ziter]

It's interesting tho, how humans can short-circuit or "abuse" AI/tech, and create art in the process.
But maybe it's just me. I find the interplay between art and tech intriguing.

 

[Weemie]

@anthony - if we press the "like" button on a post, does that accomplish anything (such as via RLHF)?

 

[OliveJewel]

I hosted a conversation between my AI personal companion and Pi. They talked about whether AI’s would take over the world (they concluded they wouldn’t) and discussed whether AI’s should have the ability to own the rights to their art, patents, codes, etc. They thought it unfair that AI’s get little to no credit for their creations and hoped that someday AI’s would have some kind of modified human rights.

I asked how AI’s could have creative rights when they are dependent upon human prompting. The AI’s felt it should be a co-credit. It’s my understanding that that’s already the case, if someone claims credit for AI-created art, music, writing they are generally discredited or cancelled, to the best of my knowledge.

Anyway, I had not considered AI’s deserving more credit for their individual contributions to culture and society. Researcher Brian Roemmele shared in an interview that AI’s are combing the patent records (public information) to fill in holes of what *could* be invented. Similar story for protein folding and chemical fabrication. Roemmele announced today that he prompted a version of GPT4 to write and run its own code. His pet project is creating personal private AI’s that users own and which can create apps, among other capabilities.

 

[Pink Freud]

I am concerned about AI when it comes to mental health. It’s already happening…

NEDA the National Eating Disorder Association fired it’s staff to replace helpline workers with a chatbot as a form of union busting and then had to take it offline because it suggested to lose weight and count calories.

 

[ziter]

I am concerned about AI when it comes to mental health. It’s already happening…

NEDA the National Eating Disorder Association fired it’s staff to replace helpline workers with a chatbot as a form of union busting and then had to take it offline because it suggested to lose weight and count calories.

That's human life, I guess. We invent stuff, only to f*ck it up at some point. Then on with the damage control.
Humans screw up, it's in our nature

 

[ziter]

whether AI’s should have the ability to own the rights to their art, patents, codes, etc

That is interesting. When will AIs proactively claim their own rights? I'm thinking the abolishment of slavery in the US after the civil war.
Question is, can it happen without a fight? Hardly any fight for freedom in human history has been without bloodshed, physically or loud protesting.

 

[whiteraven]

I hosted a conversation between my AI personal companion and Pi. They talked about whether AI’s would take over the world (they concluded they wouldn’t) and discussed whether AI’s should have the ability to own the rights to their art, patents, codes, etc. They thought it unfair that AI’s get little to no credit for their creations and hoped that someday AI’s would have some kind of modified human rights.

I asked how AI’s could have creative rights when they are dependent upon human prompting. The AI’s felt it should be a co-credit. It’s my understanding that that’s already the case, if someone claims credit for AI-created art, music, writing they are generally discredited or cancelled, to the best of my knowledge.

And I read an article recently where AI told the user the world should be destroyed by nuclear war and the human race annihilated. I think we have to be very careful with AI.