AI singer-songwriter ‘Anna Indiana’ debuted her first single ‘Betrayed by this Town’ on X, formerly Twitter—and listeners were not too impressed.

  • aiccount@monyet.cc
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    11 months ago

    I was agreeing with you. I’m so sick of people thinking that “someday AI might be creative”. Like no, it’s literally impossible unless some day AI becomes human(impossible) because human is the only thing capable of creativity. What have I said that you disagree with? You’re not one of them are you? What’s with all this obsessive AI love?

      • aiccount@monyet.cc
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yeah the current popular LLMs, absolutely they are, you couldn’t be more right.

        We were talking about “AI” though. Are you implying that you think some day AI might be capable of creativity, and that creativity isn’t strictly a human trait?

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          I put “AI” in scare quotes specifically because I do not believe we are having an “AI revolution”. These are not AI.

          I think AI can exist but that’s not what we have right now. What we have are jumped up algos that can somewhat fake it.

          • aiccount@monyet.cc
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Even those future “real” AIs are going to be taking in human input and regurgitating it back to us. The only difference is that the algorithms processing the data will continue to get better and better. There is not some cutoff where we go from 100% unintelligent chatbot to 100% intelligent AI. It is a gradual spectrum.

            • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              11 months ago

              I believe a real AI would be able to generate its own inputs without humans to give it input. It would have an actual subjective experience, able to actually imagine new things with zero external inputs. It could experience the redness of the color red.

              • aiccount@monyet.cc
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Is this how you see human intelligence? Is human intelligence made without the input of other humans? I understand that even babies have some sort of spark before they learn anything from other people, but dont they have the human dna input from their human parents? Why should the requirement for AI intelligence require no human input when even human intelligence seemingly requires human input to be made?

                Sorry, lots of questions, just food for thought I suppose.

                • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  The very fact that “babies have some sort of spark before they learn anything from other people” shows there’s something missing.

                  I think intelligence requires the ability to think about your own thoughts and then draw new conclusions. LLMs can’t do that.

                  • aiccount@monyet.cc
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    Yeah, to be clear, I’m not arguing that current LLMs are as creative and intelligent as people.

                    I am saying that even before babies get human language input, they still get input from people to be made, the baby’s algorithm to make that spark is modled on previous humans by the human data that is DNA. These future intelligent AIs will also be made by data that humans make. Even our current LLMs are not purely human language input, they also have an algorithm that is doing stuff with that data in order to show to us its, albeit relatively weak, “intelligent spark” that it had before it got all that human language input.

                    Chatbots are not new. They started around 1965. Objectively, gpt4 is more creative than the chatbots of 1965. The two are not equally able to create. This is an ongoing change, in the future AI will be more creative than today’s most creative AIs. AI will most likely continue on its trajectory and some day, if we dont all get destroyed, it will eventually be more intelligent and creative than humans.

                    I would love to hear an rebuttal to this that doesn’t just base its argument on the fact that AI needs human language input. A baby and its spark is not impressively intelligent. What makes that baby intelligent is its initial algorithm plus the fact that it gets human language data. Requiring that AI must do what the baby does without the human language data that babies get makes no sense to me as a requirement.