Comment

Comment on Black Mirror creator unafraid of AI because it’s “boring”

TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

By its nature, Large Language Models won’t ever be truly innovative, after all they rely on expected patterns. But a lot of the media that we consume is also made to appeal to patterns that we expect: genres, tropes, usual messages. AI could replace a lot of it and frankly, that’s scary to think in a world where we need to work to earn our living.

Truly groundbreaking art may not be what people usually seek, it’s often something they don’t even know they want until they experience it, or they might even fail to appreciate it. But it likely won’t be automated unless AI achieves full consciousness, but if it does we will have a much more complicated situation in our hands than “we can command AI to make art better than we can do ourselves”.

Still, getting paranoid over the uncertain latter won’t help us with the former that is just around the corner.

source

Sort:hotnew top

KevonLooney@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
Good points.

One problem with replacing everything with AI that people don’t think about: middle managers will start to be replaced too. There’s no way to ask a LLM “why did you do that”? Fewer people will need to be managed.

source
- TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  It seems unwise to replace managers with LLMs because LLMs don’t understand the real world implications of their responses, they don’t have awareness of the real world, they simply give you often used language patterns, which can be innacurate or biased based on flawed human data. But it would be a great way for sketchy human executives to offload responsibility for unethical actions and feign objectivity or uninvolvement, so I don’t doubt they will try.
  
  Even if we imagine a perfect AI that does takes into account every objective fact and philosophical argument, that still leaves the question of how will the people who get replaced in all these intellectual, artistic and service jobs will make a living. That’s not an answer that technology will give us, that will a nasty political situation.
  
  source
  - KevonLooney@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    No, you misunderstood. The managers are fired because there’s fewer people to manage.
    
    source
    TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    That makes sense too. Overall, a lot of people’s jobs are threatened, but I don’t think “learn AI” is going to cut it this time. Not for all these people.
    
    source
  - Honytawk@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    
    LLMs don’t understand the real world implications of their responses
    
    LLMs don’t, but specialised AI trained for that specific purpose would.
    
    source
aesthelete@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

Truly groundbreaking art may not be what people usually seek, it’s often something they don’t even know they want until they experience it, or they might even fail to appreciate it.

Everyone in these threads likes to talk about being impressed by these llm or not being impressed by them as being some sort of intelligence test. I think of it more as a test of a person’s sense of creativity.

It spits out a lot of passable text very easily, but as you’re saying here its creativity is essentially nil. Even its “hallucinations” are just versions of things it borrowed from elsewhere injected slightly to wildly out of context in order to satisfy a prompt.

source
- Honytawk@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  And who is to say that we humans don’t process creativity exactly the same way? By borrowing from things we encounter.
  
  Even the earliest creative expats of humans was just things we saw in nature, which we drew on cave walls.
  
  We humans just have more experience since we existed longer, so the line feels a lot more blurred.
  
  I also encountered games made by humans that were so boring I couldn’t manage more than 10 minutes.
  
  source
  - aesthelete@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    
    And who is to say that we humans don’t process creativity exactly the same way? By borrowing from things we encounter.
    
    That’s part of it, but it’s definitely not all of it.
    
    There’s more creativity in the average prompt generation than there is in any response I’ve ever seen from ChatGPT.
    
    If creativity were as simple as mashing a few things together as you’re saying, ChatGPT would be there already because it’s obviously what it’s doing.
    
    source
- Indicah@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  
  I also find the same with generated content in other video games. At its best it’s passable and that’s about it.
  
  Minecraft would like to have a word with you…
  
  source
  - aesthelete@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    Minecraft isn’t generating new animals or narrative. Landscape generation is relatively straightforward from an algorithm / computation perspective. If it started generating its own models or characters or character dialogue I suspect it would very quickly fall into the territory of what I’m talking about.
    
    There’s just a feeling of emptiness to me that’s pervasive in games with main parts of narrative or gameplay that are randomly generated.
    
    source