even then, the japanese robots are still just fancy if/then statements...they're not sentient either...have talked to some of the people leading the teams...they would NEVER overhype their own progress the way the media is doing...
That’s not general AI. That thing doesn’t think unprompted. You can power Aida and just not ask it anything an it won’t do anything in 100 years. And if you ask it to draw conclusions on hypotheticals it will either hallucinate something unintelligible or just list preexisting opinions from human authors on the matter.
All these ‘conversations’ with AI aren’t conversations. This is not* “general” AI so it can’t actually think its own thoughts. It’s just spitting out data it’s collected
They are In a sense, she is answering a question and when he asked her a question she couldn't answer she said why. I mean that's what humans do we spit out data from our memories and learning. I'm sure it will evolve to be more human. I guess when they start Inventing things It wil be more like us although she Invented her art pieces so there's that.
@@Pulse2AM This is only a conversation in the sense that you are talking to something but that robot can't actually think for itself. We're a long way from general AI
It's not AI it's simply automation allowing existing human content to be represented in a slightly different way. Basically it's coded to mimic true AI and that's it. For true AI we need a huge leap in quantum computing and moving away from silicon based architecture to enable the processing power and software complexity required for true AI to be achieved. Ai-Da is just a gimmick.
The sad thing is that we have been devaluing art for decades. This soulless machine has produced more technically accomplished and thoughtful work than a lot of the soulless dross churned out by many human artists, I mean calling a banana taped to a wall, art,.....well i hope that it puts these conmen out of a job, they have done more damage to the concept of art than this thing ever has
Going full science fiction scenario here but if an AI ever becomes truly conscious and able to feel emotions (or whatever the equivalent would be to emotions in such a scenario) then maybe it's art would have meaning and validity. But yeah, as it stands now, AI art has little to no artistic merit.
@@AngelBeeps What is artistic merit? If you walked In a gallery and Aida's paintings were there and some human woman said they were hers would they have merit then if you thought they looked great? The "arts" music, film literature, painting, sculpture etc. is inherently the creation Itself, the Interpretation if is it or isn't art is left to the Individual to decide. I think Warhol made that pretty clear with some of his work.
Someone hooked up an LLM to a stable diffusion image generator then plugged that in to a bunch of controllers and servos to render the result. Big whoop.
She's kinda of hot In an overly Intellectual mousey AI robot kind of way. Call me Aida grrrrr! 😂 Man anyone born right now is gonna live In a much different world than an old guy like me.
Typical young, impatient male human. Fastening on the "I am not a risk" and her comments about AI risk is pure click-baitery. There was nothing in the slightest alarming about her response. This is why we need a completely new model for journalism. When titillating an audience is more important than reporting the facts (as has been the case for a while now), we've got trouble. Also he was rude, doing another very typical young male thing - not listening/interrupting.
The fact that the robot artist needed more processing time to answer the question about what problems will be most likely caused by AI is deeply concerning...
The only rule of art is that it must have no function other than onto itself. If it has function, then it's design. AI is pure design and because of it's perfectability could never reflect the human condition. Just as art is the only thing that separates us from other primates, art in the hands of AI is like putting Tories in charge of developing an inclusive society.
😂 Surely the machine's creators are by extension creators of the machines creations? Like a printer or those robots that spray paint cars? The intellectual property belongs to whoever build this.
The only thing I find that's weird is how realistic it isn't. Honestly, even the most cursory glance at the make-up and animatronics in Hollywood should tell that this is far from state-of-the-art. Equally it mystifies me that no-one bothers to place the speaker at the end of a tube and get a half decent sound designer to set the tone up. Event the chatbot's LLM, which has nothing to do with the puppet, is not at GPT4 level.
This is clearly a prototype. You're not really thinking about this in a three-dimensional way. Forget about the skin and the outside functions. If this robot can think and analyze a simulation of thoughts and opinions. That is staggering. The outside shell is easier to perfect than the so-called brain of it. I know you talk about chatGPT, but that seems to be less complicated than this.
call me a luddite but this is clearly at some stage going to be a Pandora's box and will clearly be misused by humans and once AI fully starts thinking for itself that is when the real danger can happen, when it may view humans as dangerous or replaceable
That discussion was magnificent! I understnad that Mendel would call me mad for this, but is there any kind of ancestral link between Ai-Da and Jacqueline Bisset? Some kind of resemblance there unless I've had one too many this afternoon. Was Ms Bisset a robot too?