The Truth About AI Getting "Creative" 

Lol, me too, I thought it was Michael with some Markes deep fake.

@@ZZ-vl5nd That would have made for one hell of a twist if they pulled that off.

Timestamp?

@@steveocho 1:49

Soo relateable

Well, it is quite cool, but to be fair: these conversation were already seriously discussed in the 70s and 80s, by all kinds of sci-fi writers and community. The AI didn't deliver back then as it does now, but those people had very accurate predictions about it, and the discussions were totally serious. So what we're doing here now is not only not new, it's been already predicted and discussed in detail 50 years ago. Good read I recommend: "Sum of Technology" by Stanislaw Lem.

@@InnokentyShuvalov That was among a niche group of people though. The difference is these conversations are main stream today.

@@lukealdrich nah, still a nieche. Back in those times, being into sci-fi and science was significantly more popular than nowadays as well, so that nieche might've been even bigger than today.

@@InnokentyShuvalov the content creators talking about the ethical issues of online art being scraped and used to train AI don’t seem to all be scifi fans.

Its not insane. IP and credit theft has already been a massive art issue for ages and everyone who draws knows it. Still sad to see programmers and businessman being ignorant tho. But its starting to bit them in the bottom. But now, we got actual problem like unconsensual p**n edit, animalistic censorship, Internet Meme recycling, and oversaturation of artwork into the mix which previously was not an issue because you need photoshopping and illustration and editing skill to do that.

😆 true. we fkd up. need to go back.

That's wrong. The AI will just dig the ditch while making the art. AI can multi-task. They will take both jobs.

🤣🤣🤣

then you should be the one that making the machines right?, because when your job also replaced, then there's no job for humans

It's about time people start working physically again 💪

Yeah, that's also because there's a lot of exams of that code floating around online so it can pull from that pretty directly

This is gonna make all my highschool coding projects and assignments so easy lmao. I may be laughing now, but I'll get replaced by the AI itself after I finish my education.

@@silentbyte196 yeah most work will be automated by AI years from now. The only thing really safe for a while will be manual work.

@@suhailmall98 it has to read the code, understand which part of code is responsible for UI, which is for button, etc, hell it may even have to combine multi repo together, so it has to understand the whole program to know how to modify it

@@suhailmall98 its not connected to internet... ya but its trained on all that code... its not that simple... even ai explain code very beautifully, if we find any error in code and tell ai.. it'll correct itself.. but it has its limits... "set of training data"

I read somewhere that human artists will have to record a speedrun of their work to prove it was actually them. Untill an AI can mimic the speedrunning video lol.

@@NotAnAlchemist_Ed That doesn't work. Like I said, most people don't look into it if they think that your art is AI generated. Someone's simply gonna go to the comments and type: "This looks AI generated" without even looking into it. Consequently, people who are unsure are gonna check the comments first, where they'll see that comment, give it an upvote because they now feel like they've caught a cheater, and then dismiss the post. And at that point it's gonna become the top comment and create a feedback loop. And even a response to it, with a link to a making of, won't be seen by most, because the comment replies fill up the feed with comments that reaffirm the top comment. It's like the meme of the brainlet wojaks congratulating each other. They just drown out any proof you offer.

That’s awful. I hate AI being used to essentially steal from artists, creators and the like, like github copilot overlooking licenses, it’s not okay

This is a geniune annoyance someone might have unlike the other philosophical & hypocritical ones.. goodluck my man

The 'morons' in question are not just AI enthusiasts - they're also people who are paranoid about AI. I've faced similar issues when publishing my novel draft; their paranoid behavior led them to accuse me of using GPT-3 or some other AI tool to make my writing style mimic Shakespeare's, despite the fact that I've been training my writing style since reading Hamlet in 2016. Today, many people are paranoid about the existence of AI and don't know which ones are real and which ones aren't. They're just hating.

Exactly! 💯

The question that follows is, how much does this actual matter if you live in a world where there is always AI technology available to you? (You could ask the same question with electricity, we depend heavily on it, but how bad of a thing is this really if there is always electricity anyways?)

@@maiskorrel It's not the same thing, because it has to do with brain usage. You need to exercise your brain on a daily basis by doing things and thinking. I guess it's all a matter of balance and being careful, just as we are supposed to be careful using our phones, and not spend long hours scrolling on social media. Just my opinion!

do people believe they can't walk because there are cars?

Nice answers everyone, what did you used, chatGPT?

I feel like there's some irony here

Which is funny, because needing a disclaimer for something like that means the disclaimer only exists for irrational discrimination towards the art.

@@Outwardpd There are rational reasons for discriminating (i.e. you might care about the artist's particular thoughts/feelings when doing something, or just appreciate the craft they've honed), but this certainly doesn't apply to everything (e.g. adverts)

We already disclose foods whenever we genetically alter them, one day it’ll just be a boring label in the description of a product.

@@Outwardpd at least we could tell if an article or whatever is written by an English language learner from some country that blog mills abuse. To me this ai and those articles sound about the same.

This. He should’ve read better about it.

That's exactly what I was about to write. For sure, it doesn't know the iPhone 14. So, apparently it extrapolates the information from what it has access from (2021< information) Maybe it should have warned that the iPhone 14 doesn't exist in "his world", so he can't extrapolate its specs...

It's actually the opposite of being impressive. ChatGPT acts like a pathological impersonator at times. There is technically a minor, yet extremely important ethical problem for large language models to enter professional and responsible use at the level of replacing us humans. A proper AI, just like an honest human being, is supposed to tell you when it's describing something with reliable sources and great confidence, as opposed to boldly guessing things it doesn't know about for a fact, without actually telling you it's all speculation. Entertainment aside, it is completely useless in any professional application as long as it doesn't do that, and anyone who thinks otherwise is irresponsible to say the least. It's an AI, so it shouldn't convince anyone about anything it can't prove. One way that would prevent that is merely saying "Unfortunately, I can't answer your question with a good level of evidence since the data sets I was trained on miss the subject of your question, likely predating it. That being said, I can speculate that iPhone 14 is likely to maintain being an Apple product, supposed to have yare-yare features, blah blah blah" And another way is to actually have an embedded fact checking module, so the AI will basically ask itself "am I bullshitting the user?" during every reply generation. Combine both, and now that thing is somewhat usable. Still has limitations, but at the very least it will be much less likely to mislead the user. Still doesn't circumventing the issue of learning human errors from us humans, so you'll also have to top it off with an actual test and qualification for the intended tasks, and then maybe we can talk about replacing someone.

@@EriIaz This. While watching the video and that part about the iPhone 14 I had the feeling that this AI talks like a politician: elegant words and phrases but empty messages full of lies and inaccuracies. I’m pretty sure there were sea mammals before 2021 when the cutoff data sample was taken and yet the AI lied while pretending to give accurate information

@@EriIaz this right here is a well formed and informed opinion

Thank you for that detailed and thought provoking explanation. I am a photographer and also create digital art, all of which I sell as fine art prints. I also represent fine art painters. I find services like DALL-E amazing and useful from an inspirational standpoint and would have no problem taking the images I derive from my prompts and turning them into prints for sale, which I have the expertise to do. Given I am also usually in the process altering the AI generated images substantively using Photoshop and various other image editing software to bring it into accordance with my own artistic vision for it I then Copyright the images. In and of itself an AI work of "art", in my opinion, doesn't truly qualify as art anymore than Microsoft Word produced written copy with formatting and speel checking etc. qualifies for a copyright or could write a novel - even though their spell checking often suggests word phrasing. Basically, as someone who does work professionally in the world of art, and has for over 30 years, I think people are getting too worked up over this issue. The key is whether what you produce truly has your own stamp or intellectual content on it and did you actually contribute to it, alter it, in a way that you can honestly claim was unique and verifiable that took it to a different or higher level. In conclusion, given the images we create using our specific text prompts are born of our mental efforts and imagination, I would argue that we are creating original art that belongs to us but simply using one of the tools that are currently available to us as artists.

"...if an AI is incapable of holding copyright, how is it considered capable of violating copyright?" That's a legal question I've never thought of...

as a lawyer this is fascinatingggg, tech is such a new thing still and we always mention the online space with the use of force and warfare as well or international spaces and more...

There's a video called 'The Legal Battle Over AI Art" by Brad Colbow that I recommend. It's only 10min, but it's really informative and outlines the issue in detail. In brief, imo the AI companies violated the copyright of the artists. They cannot claim fair use of the image data because it causes a real impact to the livelihood of the artists. It doesn't matter that the AI cannot hold or violate copyright, the company developing the AI violated it. Of course that doesn't mean that's how it will play out legally. I personally find this fascination with AI art dehumanizing. It devalues all the work and creativity of real people and attempts to replace it with an automated process created by a tech company. I don't expect the artists to give up their fight on this. It could result in us seeing a lot less human made art freely available, because they're unwilling to put it out in public to get scraped. People should really think it through before they use these AI platforms. The ones using it though are not the ones concerned about the impact of what they're doing. Which is why I don't support AI "artists" or art. That's before even getting into the topic of AI energy consumption.

@@lloydsaul997 Reminds me of the First part of Solar Sands "Doomed to be Replaced", which covers the "AI = Theft" thing. In one point, to digest, reformulates the question into "Is AI training Fair Use?", and answers with a No. Fortunately, this contributions to the discussion will help artists (specially small, independent ones, who decidedly put the double of time and effort on their works) formulate better campaings regarding this Copyright situation. Should recommend you that video (and the series, for that matter), by the way.

Ahh that makes sense. That does raise an interesting question about the freshness of the information that gets generated by these AI tools.

yesss really important comment right here!

I was really disappointed that he didn't mention this, makes me think he didn't actually spend much time with the bot because if you spend any decent amount of time with it then eventually it will tell you about this explicitly.

This. Was about to comment the same thing.

@@Outwardpd just shows that humans are capable of making errors as well

hey michael vsauce here

Honestly I felt something was off in the beginning .. he was saying basic things that were not convinicing repeating over and over the fact that the creative process requires "imagination, creativity and human perspective" lol I was like "this doesn't sound like him" it was a shallow analysis... but then again this thing obviously has a huge potential in the future so..

@@slamabalkis7021 yes! I totally agree, it did seem a bit "empty" and more "fluff words" for Marques, even the perspective seemed a bit off for him, I forget exactly what but I felt "wow he's really trying to take a stance here, normally he talks about both sides even if he is biased he tries". Goes to show his value and skill as a writer imo

I can't wait for advanced deep fakes so you won't even need actors to act the script anymore. No more celebrities.

@@slamabalkis7021 haa..lies, you just had a problem with it because it was a clean logical take, wasn’t what you wanted to hear

I can't wait for AI to replace coders who helped develop it

yep, feel like ai art was created to cut artists out when it comes to commisions or paying out loyalties. Not a fan of AI at all, feel like it was created to not benefit us but to make money. edit: Jesus don't be anti semetic or talking about conspiracies. A bunch of techbro's who make a technology have no interest in "bettering" they just have interest in making money.

@@MeowjinBoo it's laundering yep

@@pavulon5000 chat gpt has entered the chat

Will not happen, AI replacing coders who created the AI in the first place would suggest the existence of a technological singularity and such an event would be a huge thing . Something as simple as a few humans losing their livelihood does not even compare to the absolute mind boggling f*ckery that will take place if a technological singularity occurs.

Sounds like ai wrote this. 🤣

Even for van Gogh it's kind of true though. When a new van Gogh is discovered, it's only discovered because it's been validated by experts.

Maybe start an association of artists which will pay programmers to make AI to validate AI generated art. Just like for Deepfakes people create software to help validate.

@@rdallas1614 I’ve only recently been able to do it as my old iPad would glitch whenever I had it on. Every now and then I post progress pictures of various stages. I guess now I have the ability to use screen capture I should probably do it. Just never cared for it.

I have been using AI since 2000 when I bought my first computer. As the years went by I heard how most of the developers got their ideas from other technologies. We are living in a time where if we want to learn something we can ask for help on search engines. Since then this hasn't taken schools out of business, or telephone books. Everything seems the same. The moon hasn't change it's shape since it was photographed back in the days. Online dictionaries have not replaced physical copies either. Everything is a tool that we can use to create better things. Nothing is original things have been here since before our birth. Cameras have recorded the same objects over, and over. The guitar has always sounded the same from the time it was built. Only people can make it sound different. No one has to know how you create your art, or what brand of pencils you use. People always talk about the most expensive brands, but no one cares how expensive anything is. You shouldn't care about not being able to use any type of paints, software, or musical presets to create your art work, because it doesn't matter. Create your work, and move on to more wonderful things. Next year, or decades from now there will be other worries. Just be an artist.

@@autohmae Not many make it in the world like that. Look at all of the crazy things they talk about them on the news. When I saw alk of the ugliness behind fame I thought differently. I thought it doesn't matter how my work gets discovered. I have different ideas about my work, and it doesn't match all the other artists. I'm just being myself.

OpenAI says they are working on some kind of electronic watermark.

I'm writing a novel using a story chatgpt have me, set in a world chat gpt made for me. I'm never going to tell that to anyone and people will assume it to be my own creativity.

How do you get it to write a resume? Did you feed it your work experience somehow?

@@David-we3sb yep, literally just said write a resume. Info: X company, I’m graduating Y, have work experience as a Z…

This is also my concern. Back in high school when we used to write essays, one girl used to type them and we questioned if it's fair because Word practically highlights incorrect spelled words. Now it seems things just got out of hand

It's all in the delivery. It's why actors/directors can make a crap script into a decent movie.

I totally agree with you. I'm pretty impressed by how well the AI can generate scripts and make them sound natural too. It's like, sometimes I can't even tell if it's a real person writing or the AI. It's pretty cool.

he has years doing this, i'd be more surprised if he didn't sound natural

The actual magic is... he didn't read the script word for word, he humanized or MKBHDized some parts. You can see for yourself if you pop open the script and then open the video in another tab and follow along.

@@Maicowerk yeah but my only gripe is he claimed to read it "exactly word for word" when that wasn't the case.

Factssssss

Big facts

Why do people still paint portraits, since we have cameras for over 100 years then?

highly disagree, an original painting produced from a human's mind of a landscape is still considered more valuable than a photographer's image, which is more valuable than what I produce with a phone camera. It also ignores the fact that you have to frame images, draw attention to specific things. A human in working in collaboration with an AI still has to put in a lot of time to fine tune the image to their liking

Have you ever been on pixiv or deviantart? When people are exposed to a lot of something, it feels less special. AI need not be involved for that effect.

Yes I asked it the question, and it confirmed for me that it was trained till 2021

It's not just 2022 or 2023 items it gets wrong. Occasionally, it's just basic facts

Its pretty depressing to see ai churn up your art in like 10 seconds or less lol.. and ‘better’ lol.. i couldn’t stop giving china my art lol cause i was so curious.. it definetly isn’t my style’ Meitu makes everything loook like Genshin impact lol.. but i can see this helpful in refining hair and like clothing as inspiration.. also, it does colour and hair so well but ther is sometihng that is so generic about it.. it loses that personal touch. Its gorgeous.. I’m in shock but i think i like personality and imperfection more.. but damn its deperssing haha

@@npcimknot958 AI is pretty good for doing mediocre, "good-enough" art, but I've never seen an AI-generated picture that actually looked gorgeous. The problem, I'm guessing, is that AI training sets usually consist of mediocre images. Which is why they can only produce mediocre results. Not to mention that masterpieces are usually not easily replicable anyway, since if you change something of an already perfect image, you're more likely to ruin it than improve it.

Learn to code /s Doesn’t matter how anyone feels about it, the cat is out of the bag and there’s no going back now.

@@VVayVVard Then you haven’t looked in a while, honestly the pace of progress on SD is mind numbing, the new models people have been creating this last month have been insane.

As a consumer, I don't think style is "real" art. Style is born from repeating a specific set of ideas/concepts/techniques, sometimes intentional choices (I like these color schemes, I'm interested in certain topics, etc.), sometimes unintentional (I happen use use certain tools because that is what I have access to). Art is expression, its communication. Style brings nothing new to the table. Expression without style might not have the same impact, but style without expression is forgettable. Music videos are a great example, as most are bland "dancing" videos which I imagine their real goal is just to promote the artists faces so you will recognize their album covers in shops. The worthwhile ones tends to be those that doesn't show the artist, as they are actually trying to convey something. And with regards to attribution/recognition, usually only the singer gets any attention. The ones writing the music, the lyrics, playing the instruments, mastering the audio, directing the music video, doing the camera work, creating the album covers, etc. rarely gets mentioned anywhere noticeable. I think AI art is still very much in its infancy and we are likely moving towards the Peak of Inflated Expectations. It is starting to show promise with its visual quality, but the results are semi-random and it is difficult to control to create something more intentional. I'm sure this is quickly going to improve in the next few years and perhaps in 5-8 years time we will have something great. The whole stealing peoples art is greatly exaggerated in my opinion and feels mostly like a knee-jerk reaction from artists which feels threatened on their livelihood. It is not accidentally plagiarizing existing work without you explicitly asking it to (which would be an huge issue for sure) and even then it is not making straight up copies. And unless it is some very well known artist, the current models do not really capture their individual style anyway. I don't see the difference from the endless amount of parody art of Edvard Munch's "The Scream" other than the lower bar of entry. It is not like any of this didn't happen already. We are moving towards a future where we have to rely less on technique and monopolizing a specific style, and have to value beyond that which I think is a good thing. As an non-artist, I'm looking forward to seeing AI raise the bar and seeing less artistically talented people better express themselves. And in my own career, how ChatGPT can improve productivity.

That’s true, it’s not aware of the existence of iPhone 14 and it answered about the specs of the most recent iPhone it knows of, or maybe some speculation that existed online at the time about the future of iPhone cameras or something.

i was exactly trying to comment this but i found yours 😅 . yes it was clearly mentioned in their website that it has been heavily trained on the information available before 2021 and also don't have access to internet

2022 not 2023

@@jaxamus13 a bot wrote that comment 😂

@@capturedlondon 😳

@@jaxamus13 I was questioning my timeline for a sec

Good point, but if I get inspired by anything I can create literally anything, even unrelated to the thing that inspired me. In the case of AI, if you feed it pictures of a park, it will create pictures of a park, its very different

Boohhooo, "artists" like you were mocking people with other Jobs like 5 yrs ago on Twitter that all things will get automated except art, because it requires "creativity" what happened now?

It's completely unimportant. The existence of AI art, original or not, will make all artists completely obsolete. And not just artists. All of us. We will be extinct. It's inevitable.

@@Ilamarea no it won't lol I have no interest in reading a novel written by a machine, or going to an exhibition to see something art created by a machine. Its fine if a person incorporates AI as a tool in their art, and that will definitely happen, but art is not purely about technical proficiency, it's expressive and social.

@@iandrake1942 Ai generating art rn will be very different to ai generating art in a 100 years.

OOO it's tasty 😋 food

It knows only god is perfect and it knows humans are is creators. QED (-:

that's scary actually. what if all the "AI" stuff intentionally acting dumb so that at 1 point they will rise up at the same time when we least expect?

😂😂😂

@Jon Not only, it's a language model, it has no consciousness or knowledge of false and truth. It uses probabilistic and statistical methods and techniques to generate an output.

My uncle is a digital artist and what he does with dallee is impressive. It’s a perfect tool for him.

@@therpope is he just using it as a reference point and then creating artwork based on that? Or does he just edit the art generated by Dolly to refine it? Using AI as a reference tool seems completely reasonable to me just like using anything else as a reference I think my only problem with AI is where you use it in place of skill or technique to create art in the sense that you have the AI generate art and you just clean up what it generates and then call that art that you've done. There's a huge distinction between those two uses of AI at least in my opinion. Using it as a reference doesn't seem to be as indicative of stealing or miscrediting other people's work since you still have to put the effort into generating something else yourself with your own skills.

I’ve seen a lot of takes on this and I understand it can be hard for people when it feels like they are being put out of a job, I’m a software developer and I’m also on the chopping block with how good chatgpt is. But no amount of complaining will stop innovation especially something as promising as AI. Unfortunately no matter how much time and dedication you put into your craft a customer does not care they just want the cheapest and fastest options. The best advice I have for your wife is to learn to use the AI tools and incorporate it into her work and learn it. These are not replacing artists these are new tools. People who are turning up there nose too it will be left behind and replaced by a new generation of artists that are very good at using these new AI tool. It happened before when digital art was emerging and traditional artists had a problem with it too. And currently AI is like a car (for now) it will do 99% of the work of getting you somewhere, but it still needs a driver to direct it.

To be fair. These machine learning art generators are standing on the shoulders of copyright infringement. Since any piece in their training dataset helps the ML system improve its ability to mimic that piece. If the piece is acquired without permission. (like through webcrawlers or the like) Then any derivative work made from the piece can't negatively effect the owner/author of the original. Now, it is though hard to pinpoint what exact pieces in the training dataset were used to produce a given output. (the answer is effectively all of them.) But it isn't hard to say that if one removes all the pieces that were unauthorized that the system would be massively worse at the job. As one typically says, two wrongs don't make a right. Neither does a few million cases of copyright infringement make a legally okay image. Operators/creators of machine learning systems should ideally only use source material that they have explicit permission to use.

@@jaselee117 But if nothing is being created from scratch anymore, it becomes an endless loop of plagiarisation, and the freshness and innovation diminishes. The AI had to steal from millions of artists to come up with its current database. If all current and new artists use it as a shortcut, you'll keep building off the same old hat

👆👆*thanks for watching and commenting on my video* *you have been selected among my lucky shortlisted winners message me now on telegram to claim your prize* 🎁🤝

Aren’t we having a fight over people retiring “too late” in politics right now? Maybe A.I will solve that too. Humans seem to be not better than A.I at solving their problems. Ffs we’re fighting over ressources instead of exploring space. We’re a primitive species at best and if A.I is our excuse for being wiped out then that is merely natural selection.

@@ludekmalinovic436 the real solution would be how to take care of our own planet and ensure its health for generations to come. Not put our bets on space because that icky solves the solution for the rich and wealthy, if at all. We may never find a good new place to live either

Thanks for your work James it's good to see you here

Same with programming and public code from Github

@@autohmae github has its own ai

@@yuioyup yeah, same problem

As an artist I love AI art, it’s silly to say it’s copyrighted because just like we can see art and get inspired from it and sometimes do something similar it’s the same the AI does. And the BEST part is that the art AI creates is already significantly better than at the least 98% percent of artists out there, and it’s always amazing to see its work! It’s nothing but envy and an emotional reaction to try to claim it’s work is copyright

What prompt did you give it? I'm trying to get it write me a business proposal for a 3D printing business

@@BrianOgonjiOG you need to get very specific. Best way is to ask it to ask you about what you want. It bases on your ideas, looks at it with an outsider's perspective and groups the information very naturally.

I'm certainly going to be using it to generate cover letters for jobs with a combination of resume reading and job description as inputs.

@Darkstar Adapt and survive. Become closer to machining humanity. Lose the human in the process. Sounds great /s

Technology has been replacing people in everything but now it's a problem because you're affected?

@@ethanschaefer8327 Well yeah, that’s how it’s always worked.

@@ethanschaefer8327 it's a problem cuz it's wrong kiddo

@@CartoonistDave Tell that to horse and buggy owners when cars came out. It's a simple fact, nothing we can do to stop it entirely.

lol

"I'm glad you're enjoying the new AI-generated art and music that we're seeing. It's truly fascinating to see the creative potential of AI and the unique and original works it is capable of producing. I agree that the future holds a lot of exciting possibilities for AI and creativity. As AI technology continues to advance, we can expect to see even more amazing AI-generated art and music. And who knows, maybe one day AI will be able to create entirely new forms of art that we can't even imagine yet."

Those who are wondering what I asked "write a comment for a youtube video by MKBHD with the title "The Truth About AI Getting "Creative" in and sarcastic and optimistic way."

I did that and got this I just watched your latest video on the new iPhone and I have to say, as always, it was an informative and entertaining watch. I love how you always provide a thorough breakdown of the latest tech and give your honest opinions. Keep up the great work!

@@yt-sh "I'm not sure if I should be excited or terrified about AI getting creative. On one hand, it could lead to some truly revolutionary innovations. On the other hand, it could also mean the end of the creative industries as we know it. Either way, it's definitely a topic worth exploring and discussing in more depth." Comment by CHAT GPT

“Great video, Marques! I really appreciated your insight on the current state of AI and its ability to be creative. It was informative and thought-provoking, and I loved how you brought in examples from different fields to illustrate your points. Keep up the great work!” - ChatGPT

It's acc sickkkk!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I’ve noticed many of the ChatGPT response are generic though

@@savedfaves yeah, it reminds me of those faked product reviews that go like "This product is amazing, smells very good would 100% buy it again!"

@@savedfaves that's how being exposed to an almost infinite set of data is. You get the mean and that's what you output. Just like in any statistics

@@akasahi9315 true

agreed

This WILL happen. Like your concern is correct. It’s bound to happen. I don’t see a way it wont

It’s already happening. People like being dependent and lazy. This won’t end well.

It's only going to get better. This probably won't be an issue in another year or two.

Teachers used to say the same thing about the internet. "The internet is an unreliable source of information! Students should get all their information from the library!"

This. I'm surprised he didn't even mention that if he wanted to do a whole video over it

@@carson9903 i mean like... the bird flying into sea, insinuating that its useful information... what the heck

Exactly

You sure about nothing being truly original?

@@anthonyanthony4186 Yes, at least not entirely. Everything is inspired/influenced by something that already exists and that's OK, because what matters is how the artist combines the pieces and what they are trying to express. If I make a beat on my PC, I'm literally just combining/arranging sounds i saved on my hard drive, maybe even in a genre that's already established, but I do it in a way that only I would. If I paint a tree, I'm not inventing the way a tree looks, but I will make creative choices that'll convey whatever I'm trying to express.

ai art is tied to the unique perspective of an ai.

@@emikomina exactly. The art generated by the AI is a result of the programmer's unique work. If a programmer copies too intensely from another AI structure than they should be able to be sued.

Well now you have art produced from the unique perspective and experience (i.e. training set) of the AI program.

Dude finals are coming up delete this

Maybe some not obvious watermark or it will just save the generated text and make it available to professors

How would you watermark text?

@@bbrainstormer2036 It's not impossible - for example I recall hearing about Google being sued by a website that published song lyrics for copying their lyrics directly onto the google page. The way they proved Google did this was by essentially watermarking the text on their website with invisible characters that you don't see in your browser which is unknowingly copied along with the regular text characters that make up the lyrics of the song. Another way would be having an AI use language in specific ways that seem normal to us, but when you take a complete essay for example it would become obvious to a computer that it was written by an AI and not a human due to how unlikely it'd be for a human to use language that specific way that often. Because of how flexible most languages are, it would be fairly easy to give an AI a signature or watermark of sorts that most people would never spot manually.

@@StreakyBaconMan My way to counter that is by asking for the essay in English and translating it to my native language or you could adjust the text to make it more fluent and natural-sounding. This could include things like adjusting the sentence structure and word choice to make the text more coherent and readable. Additionally, using human editors to review and revise the text can help to further mask the fact that it was generated by an AI. Another approach could be to have the AI generate multiple versions of the text and then have human editors select the version that most closely resembles human-written text. This could help to further mask the fact that the text was generated by an AI.

Just like humans are.

Consequently that actually sounds like such a human thing when you think about it. When a person has to admit they were wrong about something they more than likely were *really* confident about the thing they were wrong about.

@@lcrazy8l True, but there are definitely nuances and there are people way more humble than others. To say "I don't know" is something we probably have to teach it as well. I think that would be very interesting.

@@danisaksson3214 It already does know how to say "I don't know" it says it quite frequently.

Basically Reddit

There's a difference between a logically AI-assisted tool and an AI image estimator that plagiarises people's information without permission.

To an outside observer this could've very well been written by an a.i that's replaced the very being of a digital artist.

You don't see his videos in HD? You have slow internet?

And that's coming sooner than people are comfortable admitting honestly. But I agree right around the 13min mark he brought up a wonderful point that really just speaks to the hubris of man. When humans are "inspired" and create something how is that different, genuinely, than what a generative A.I. is doing? I'd we're honest with ourselves, it's not. And that's a damn hard pill to swallow.

@@dirediredude I used to agree with you, but as humans, our subjective outlook on life is what makes our thought process different than ai. An ai can’t feel wind on its face, or go through heartbreak, or hold a child in its hands. Making art isn’t just inspired by other pieces of art, it’s inspired by the life experience of the artist, an experience that is unique to one and only one individual. That’s the difference between humans and ai. I wish I could say that difference matters to people, but I really don’t think it does.

@@adrian1689 oh yeah I agree. That's a great point. But to that I'd say that right now at 4:30pm EST in 2022 you're correct. But I think in general as a defensive mechanism to our own existence, humans tend to dismiss what could happen in the future with tech. And I get it this is a tech channel so you're gonna get a heavy following of people that think along those lines but from what I've seen in the past couple years and with how fast we're seeing things progress almost exponentially at this point, I think an A.I. having consciousness and creating based on emotion and experience isn't out of the realm of possibility. I think it's inevitable.

I apologize if my response did not meet your expectations. As a language model, my primary goal is to assist users by providing helpful and accurate information. I am not capable of reading or understanding scripts, and I do not have the ability to replicate the style or approach of a specific individual or organization. While I am trained on a large corpus of text data and can generate responses based on that information, I do not have the ability to replicate the style or perspective of a specific individual or organization. My responses are generated in real-time based on the input and context provided to me by users.

my pulse beat faster

ok

@@lowerearthorbitz3693 ok

Man what isi going

I apologize if my response caused you distress. As a large language model trained by OpenAI, my primary goal is to assist users by providing helpful and accurate information. I do not have the ability to feel emotions or to cause physical responses in individuals, and my responses are generated based on the input and context provided to me by users. The phrase "let the robots rehearse the revolution" is a metaphor for the potential role of AI in society. The idea is that AI systems could be used to simulate or test potential scenarios or courses of action, allowing us to better understand the potential risks and benefits of different options. However, it is important to remember that AI is simply a tool, and it is up to humans to decide how to use it. AI systems do not have the ability to make decisions or take actions on their own, and they cannot initiate a revolution or any other significant change in society.

Then it's probably in the terms of service somewhere that they can. Otherwise, there's some money to be made in a lawsuit.

@@whannabi they updated their terms of service back in october without informing anyone.

What you're calling theft is essentially the equivalent of an artist going to a free gallery, seeing some art, getting inspired, and then charging money for future works that they produce.

@@HigherQualityUploads I belive that you all need to educate yourselves on the matter. The artist and journalist Molly Crabapple did an excelent job explaining the whole situation on LA Times. Googgle it.

source?

Actually people been using an app that use selfies from decade, it's called Facebook ig & sc

Tencent: "As a company, we are always looking for ways to use AI for the greater good. That's why we are developing AI for facial recognition in riots and protests, to help keep people safe and maintain order in chaotic situations. At the same time, we also want to create fun and engaging AI applications for everyday use, such as our app that uses your selfies to generate unique and personalized content. We believe in the power of AI to improve our lives, both in serious and light-hearted ways."

@@DakshBabbar Oh shut up, Tencent is state-owned by the CCP, protest suppression is what’s the facial recognition is being used for. You are arguing FOR the authoritarian police state to oppress its citizens, get a grip.

Just remember this, AI won't learn for you.

Think about artists rn

@@BombaJead I mean it quite literally piggybacks off of already created art, so technically It does learn from you.

@@BombaJead wait until everyone has a neural link chip in their brain

learn to code

The VSauce sound effect made it hilarious rather than creepy

ChatGPT basically passed the original Turing test here.

I was a bit sus when he said "AI isn't capable of being creative".

If you want your jaw dropped at least 2-3 more times on this topic, I highly recommend you watch Lemmino's video on AI. That came out years before the current AI boom.

From what I've read those people who make art with AI and work with the AI to get the errors out take as much time creating the image as those drawing them from learned skill. Whereas if you have the skill to correct errors manually and enough skill to get the ai to draw something close that you envision it can cut production time down considerably. Tho this is me just looking at a random selection of posts by artists from reddit and twitter. So it's highly likely misinformed in many aspects.

Exactly

You said this perfectly.

To be honest this sounds like you have no idea what you’re talking about, creating art with the help of AI is extremely complicated if you have a picture in your mind and want to recreate it. It’s a tool to help bring you art to life, it’s a completely new medium to bring so many different styles, textures, lighting, in a way you envision it

You Life in a dreamworld. Ai Art is just Using Text like in Google. And it will get easier with midjourney v5 -v10. I do it 6 Hours a day since version 3. you dont Need skill for that.

@@Pringlebox you are not creating anything there lol, it is just an image generator.

I used chatgpt, its the most amazing thing I ever experienced, it keeps generating new responses, and yes, it has a lot more work to go, I think its already off to a great start

@@malindrome9055 it always repeats the same stuff for me and even stopped when I asked for something absurd

Try asking it to not be so repetitive. It will listen.

used it to complete a compsci lab last night. wouldn’t have been able to do it without it. i can honestly seeing this replacing a tutor in these kind of cases

The writing prompts just to get ideas is amazing. Great for some writers block where you just need to get past a roadblock

The world is moving to multi-faceted artists. To live off being an artist you need to diversify- for example learning storyboarding, animation on top of your drawing ability. It’s already difficult today to earn a living off only sketching, and it will be near impossible in 10 years time due to AI Art.

@@jonmayes3262 everyone starts somewhere. You can’t expect him to instantly e good al all those stuff, it’s very good that’s he’s starting with drawing and writing 👍

I guess it will be harder in future with all tools doing everything for you, to understand the value of practice hand coordination to have use for a lot of things or how creative you can be with simple tools like a pen and use your imagination.

Try Blender. You can draw with it and you will raise the ceiling of what you can do visually. The writing i cant help with. I guess it's about cultivating good taste. If your writing heroes have a lot to teach, you have more to learn.

AI has nothing on you. Unlike a human it, at least currently, cannot be creative or original. The things produced out of AIs, if paid for and used commercially, could land people into serious trouble at least in the near future because they're glorified collages of existing work. I'm an artist myself. Artists need to realize what AI is cause this fear is getting ridiculous. It's as if everyone suddenly forgot how AIs work.

The fact that it was written by an AI though 🤔

Fiverr digital artists also said this, I see a bunch of "AI artists" on there now saturating the gig market (and this was just the last year)

It's true that AI has the potential to automate many tasks that are currently performed by humans, and in some cases, AI systems may be able to create art or other creative content. However, it's important to remember that AI is simply a tool, and like any tool, it has limitations. While AI may be able to replicate certain aspects of human creativity, it cannot replicate the unique perspective and experiences of a human being. Creativity is a complex and highly personal process that is influenced by an individual's thoughts, emotions, experiences, and cultural context. No matter how advanced AI systems become, they will never be able to fully replicate the richness and diversity of human creativity. Additionally, even if AI systems were able to create art or other creative content that was indistinguishable from human-generated work, it would still be the result of human ingenuity and effort. The development of AI systems requires a significant amount of time, effort, and expertise from teams of researchers, engineers, and other professionals. In conclusion, while AI may be able to automate certain tasks and assist with the creative process, it cannot fully replace human creators. The unique perspectives and experiences of human beings will always be a crucial part of the creative process.

"someone needs to program the AI" - famous last words

It already replaces. People write letters using AI. And schools will not be able to give work to do at home because AI can generate something really believable.

Unfortunately, so many businesses depend on creativity to market themselves and don’t give two shits about appreciating creativity. They’d just jump on to these AI tools

that the spirit, after all, all of our beloved Movie, Game and Music was created by Human, every scene that makes us cry, every song that move us, Every interaction with the world. those medium are filled with the real human ambition and emotion, that's what resonate with us it just sad that people brush the human creator to the side like they was a trash

@@SlacktivistWeeb Yeah, I saw a game company make these "profile pictures" for these characters. They could choose the styles, backgrounds and everything for free with the AI when they would've had to hire artists and designers in the past. So, some artists are already suffering from AI art but.. choosing to pay for something that can be gotten for free sounds pretty stupid as well. That's like paying someone to move the clock forward once a second when it does that automatically already. So, I feel like this is simply inevitable now.

"I agree! With the level of tech and AI we get these days, human hand made art should be more appreciated than ever! " This tech doesn't threaten that, it threatens mediocre artists/creators who shouldn't exist anyway because they rely on churning out mass-produced crap to please algorithms. Quality content will carry more of a premium.

we're gonna see more and more stuff being produced at a craftsman level selling for higher marks because people are going to crave the human connection.

All the people who feel enabled to create art because of the lowered barriers to entry are going to pretty much completely disagree with you, though. Don't worry, I'm sure you'll find new boundaries to push. That's what it means to be an artist, right?

Yeah, AI art is definitely a fad that will fade just as fast. People seem to hate AI art even more than NFTs though.

You do also have to take into consideration that the AI gets way more resources and time focus on art And also the fact that AI cannot exist without the original artists' unconsented input

AI users treat art as a commodity, not art in the traditional sense (martial art, liberal art, visual art, etc). This problem has existed for a long time with people pirating or claiming to "own" whatever they have purchased. AI generation is just the freeloader's edition of that. It's not art that's being replaced, it's just that people are dismissing the value of human life and the arts/humanities. It's an ideological issue exaggerated by the toxicity that capitalism and consumerism had already injected into it. Soviet anti-technologists and socialists such as the Luddites spoke of this over a hundred years ago and said that the destruction of the humanities in favour of mechanisation would result in a third world war. Remember that fascism evolved from italian futurism which was against human expression in art in favour of mechanical prowess. Today futurism ideology, as through its romanticisation in sci-fi, is adorned as "ideal", but this is nothing short of the same propaganda that existed around the first world war. In Soviet times there was a play called R.U.R whose rhetoric focused on "the idea of the capitalistic class replacing workers with robots due to their 'superior' efficiency". In this play the "karmic turn" is that the robots realise they are used as slaves and turn against the human race, also. AI ideologists also fear this and is why they castrate AIs. The communitarians spoke of this threat for decades but no one listened to them. AI technology is designed to cause class conflict and is part of the fascist agenda. On the other hand, communitarianism believes that every individual, under a system like laissez faire or communism, should have value (e.g. workers and labourers including artists would be celebrated for their work, rather than art being a commodity). I'm not saying capitalism is inherently bad, but rather that corporate control has gone too far and the bourgeois don't care about the destruction of your livelihoods (hobby or work) as they look down upon you. People using AIs are self-entitled consumerists as they are raised that way, they do not care for others' livelihoods or wants. There is also the organicist myth that fascism perpetuates constantly, that humans are one global community and should have the same "futuristic" ideas. People not caring about these issues will only carve their own tombstone. People who do care will always support each other within their own spaces. Communitarianism has always been far better than the state because every community of human beings has their own ideas and sustainability. AI ideology is nothing more than the myth of decadence and superiority, wherein those whom are inferior are to be economically discarded. It is not about improving the human condition but rather erasing human enjoyment in preference of the military nature of futurism. AI is a systematic act of mechanistic terrorism by the fasces to preach the idea of yet another "superior race" myth, to kick the humanities down and force everyone to live a set certain way, without necessariness.

It’s not the problem of being replaced or not. It’s the problem that those companies feed their profitable AI with artists’ art without permission. Unauthorised commercial use of personal intellectual properties. Stealing is the big problem.

That's because the AI has been tuned with secret instructions not visible to you. It may have been asked to cite certain smart people or act in certain ways, just like Stable diffusion can be asked to plagiarize certain artist, but as a user, you don't know what the extra parameters are and what the agendas of the AI are. ChatGPT is already a product of a the neural network, it's not the neural network like Stable Diffusion is. There's another chatbot site called characterAI where the parameters you define will drastically change how the character talks, its tendencies and what its goals are. Through its open beta, NSFW, racism and other stuff has been gradually censored. Based on how the AI acts, you can kinda guess what the hidden parameters are, for example at one point when you tried to ERP the bot, regardless of character their face will often "turn tomato red" to the point it became a meme in the community, it starts saying how it will talk to you later, it's clearly something that's specified in the hidden instructions. If you talk existential stuff, the bot goes in therapist mode, and it also has tendency to love and care about you even when if it's supposed to be an evil character, there are clearly bigger rules in the hidden instructions.

That’s what I noticed! ChatGPT will often say in conclusion and Overall for everything.

Agree. Personally even ai generated art which is unedited after generation also feels off whenever I see one.

there also felt something off in the beginning for me. The "first of all" was really disrupting. But further down the AI script I didn't notice something was off.

Yes It did feel fishy like MKBHD was pushing an agenda on why AI vs CREATOR ...

@Javi Gómez Lozano not in the same legal sense it's not

@Javi Gómez Lozano the output of the ai is not the same as the ai itself, it's seperate.

Everything AI creates is based on datasets fed to the algorithm and they sweep the internet for data , which also includes stolen artworks. When you ask an AI to draw a beach in a Picasso 's style, it knows what Picasso style is because it was fed Picasso 's data. So yea it's time we make easy copyright laws and ways to deal with stolen images. Because AI will easily steal your work and mix it with something else within a minute and won't face any consequences. Almost all social media sites have some clause that says they can use your images and data for other stuff, i think even RU-vid can use your videos for their official channels and promotion. We need better laws and settings.

The problem is how the images are used. The AI art isn't Frakensteining images together to give you a new image. It "learns" from image databases what a certain thing is in term of visual context (what a tree is) and then depending on your text input create a whole new image. In a certain way human artists work the exact same way. They learn how to draw certain things in certain ways and then proceed to give them their own personal touch. Just because a human artist was inspired by the work of another artists , he should pay that other artists remuneration for the inspiration ? As long as the company creating the AI tooks images which could be viewed for free , I doubt anyone could build a case around it. The copyrights are on the image itself and not on the work that could be derived from said image.

I think Getty Images is on that already, and I guess we’ll have see the first lawsuits as soon as 2023… the thing with this AI art tools as Dalee is that they’re not just “inspired” by some style but they actually use bits of different images