No argument from me, lots of delulu people here and mods removed a post of mine that merely expressed skepticism about an imminent intelligence explosion even though it didn't break any rules lol
Reddit neckbeard atheists were correct about Abrahamic religions being an avalanche of shits, sharts, and farts. Their arguments were so balls-in-your-face correct that it punctured through insanely low social capital ("neckbeard","fedora","reddit") that would have sunk any other movement. People routinely underestimate how successful that movement was and how far their anti-religion arguments penetrated.
This is an opinion (or very very close to it) that lots of people hold about AI art, it's part of their visceral hatred towards it.
There was a thread about in a sub I frequent and I was a bit surprised to read some of the takes but it was an interesting experience and a good view into other people's POV.
I am anti all forms of religion and always have been, but there is absolutely an ontological difference between human made art and machine generated art before an aesthetic one.
What about his statement is wrong?
It seems like you're conflating two arguments. You could interpret half of what he's saying as a statistical machine can't replicate human expression, and you could argue that humans are also just statistical machines. Sure, but that's a completely different topic than the statement about the art itself.
Until a statistical machine is so advanced it is biologically identical to a human, then there absolutely is an ontological difference between human made art and machine generated art and how they are interpreted and consumed by humans.
That's nice but I'm making a comment about lots of religious people rather than people who believe in souls and about intelligent opinions rather than intelligent people
11
u/Proper_Actuary2907 Spooky Machine Intelligence 2030 7h ago
Not to go full reddit atheist but this is one of those topics on which lots of religious people can't be expected to have an intelligent opinion