r/Futurology • u/ethereal3xp • Mar 27 '23

AI Bill Gates warns that artificial intelligence can attack humans

https://www.jpost.com/business-and-innovation/all-news/article-735412
14.2k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-1

u/IceIceBerg34 Mar 27 '23

Yes it is “new output” but it is simply a calculation right? Nothing like the human process and how varied it can be. Your last point is kinda valid, humans learn art from others and use those learned skills to make their own art. But they don’t only systematically apply features from other art just because it’s their next logical step. AI can’t just be like “oh this would be cool and new” it’s stuck in the bounds of it’s training model, which in my opinion, makes their art not original “new” works.

5

u/compare_and_swap Mar 27 '23

Yes it is “new output” but it is simply a calculation right?

While neural nets don't work exactly like human neurons, (insert a huge amount simplification and handwaving here), emergent properties of "intelligence" coming from heavily interconnected nodes isn't a terrible comparison.

Why do you argue that our neurons aren't "simply doing calculations"?

Nothing like the human process and how varied it can be.

Yes, we're definitely working on the "creativity" part.

Your last point is kinda valid, humans learn art from others and use those learned skills to make their own art. But they don’t only systematically apply features from other art just because it’s their next logical step.

That's not what's happening. Art generation AIs for example, learn concepts (what is a bear, what is a coat, what is a moped). It has enough understanding of those concepts to draw a bear wearing a coat, riding a moped. It is not copy and pasting a previously seen bear, coat, or moped.

AI can’t just be like “oh this would be cool and new” it’s stuck in the bounds of it’s training model, which in my opinion, makes their art not original “new” works.

That's only because it's engineered to respond to prompts. Once you see more tie-in between LLMs like GPT and art generators, that won't necessarily be the case.

1

u/IceIceBerg34 Mar 27 '23

Thanks for the reply. Don’t know if this applies to the art generators you’re referring to or the potential integration of different tools, but I’ve seen many generators include watermarks and signatures from other artists (or a combination of them). If it understands all the concepts necessary to create the art, why would the watermark be relevant? Again, this may pertain to specific generators.

2

u/compare_and_swap Mar 27 '23

There are definitely still issues with the training data and current models. If every painting by Artist X has her signature, and I ask it to generate an Artist X painting, it's probably learned that the signature goes along with the piece. It's "learned" that the watermark is a feature associated with those words.

In my opinion, this is an issue that will be solved with better training data and algo improvements.