Qooper on 9/12/2022 at 15:51
Let's just hope that as it grows and tries to find its place in the world it never gets involved in politics.
Azaran on 9/12/2022 at 15:59
What's also blowing my mind about Chat GPT is you can plug in a piece of text, let's say a poem, speech, etc. on X topic, then ask it to write something in the same style on another topic, and it does so flawlessly.
E.g. I plugged in this quote from Hesiod:
"But Rhea was subject in love to Kronos (Cronus) and bare splendid children, Hestia, Demeter, and gold-shod Hera and strong Haides . . . and the loud-crashing Earth-Shaker [Poseidon], and wise Zeus . . . These great Kronos swallowed as each came forth from the womb to his mother's knees with this intent, that no other of the proud sons of Ouranos (Uranus, Heaven) should hold the kingly office amongst the deathless gods . . . Therefore he kept no blind outlook, but watched and swallowed down his children: and unceasing grief seized Rhea. But when she was about to bear Zeus, the father of gods and men, then she besought her own dear parents, Gaia (Gaea, Earth) and starry Ouranos (Heaven), to devise some plan with her that the birth of her dear child might be concealed, and that retribution might overtake great, crafty Kronos for his own father and also for the children whom he had swallowed down. And they readily heard and obeyed their dear daughter, and told her all that was destined to happen touching Kronos the king and his stout-hearted son. So they sent her to Lyettos (Lyettus), to the rich land of Krete (Crete), when she was ready to bear great Zeus, the youngest of her children. Him did vast Gaia (Earth) receive from Rhea in wide Krete to nourish and to bring up. Thither came Gaia (Earth) carrying him swiftly through the black night to Lyktos (Lyctus) first, and took him in her arms and hid him in a remote cave beneath the secret places of the holy earth on thick-wooded Mount Aigion (Aegion); but to [Kronos] the mightily ruling son of Ouranos (Heaven), the earlier king of the gods, she gave a great stone wrapped in swaddling clothes. Then he took it in his hands and thrust it down into his belly."
I then asked it to write a similar piece revolving around Egyptian mythology and got this:
But Ra, the great god of the sun, was subject in love to Nut, the goddess of the sky, and they bore splendid children, Osiris, Isis, and powerful Horus. However, Ra grew jealous of his children and cast them down to the underworld, where they were devoured by the monstrous Ammit. Nut, filled with grief and sorrow, begged her parents, Geb and Nut, for a way to save her beloved children. They complied and told her of a way to bring them back to life and exact retribution on Ra for his betrayal. Nut went to the land of Kemet, where she gave birth to Anubis, the god of death and the underworld. She entrusted him with the task of guiding the souls of the dead and protecting her children. Ra, ignorant of Nut's plan, accepted Anubis as his own and never suspected the deception. And so, Nut's children were able to rise from the underworld and claim their rightful place among the gods.
The mythology isn't always 100% accurate, but pretty close
Tocky on 9/12/2022 at 19:10
Yes, but I am severely disappointed it never once said god Ammit.
demagogue on 10/12/2022 at 01:18
Quote Posted by Azaran
where they were devoured by the monstrous Ammit.
:erm:
Edit: Oh shi... I missed the joke. Bah! Cue airplane.jpg.
PigLick on 10/12/2022 at 13:08
My son who is studying computer science and math at university told me over breakfast about this AI can mimic code well enough that its very hard to tell it isnt legitimate code. Also another friend of mine had it write out a whole ruleset for a boardgame idea, that actually kinda works.
We thought AI would take over the world but its just gonna take over our creative spaces, music is next probably.
demagogue on 10/12/2022 at 13:27
I've been playing with Band in a Box for 4 or 5 years now, and its AI was already spitting out pretty good original tunes every 10th attempt or so. So yeah, I think that's a given.
Sulphur on 10/12/2022 at 13:47
Quote Posted by PigLick
music is next probably.
(
https://openai.com/blog/jukebox/) Have fun! There's more if you google, of course.
Quote Posted by Aja
Y'all are making me feel like I'm arguing on the wrong side of history, but I just don't see how these certain important aspects of artmaking could be made obsolete by technology. The more interesting aspect to me is, as dema says, how artists can use AI to create new forms of art.
Nah, no one's arguing that the creation of art is going to be supplanted completely by AI. But you're going to have to live with idea that the machine-created art will live in the same space as the real thing and mess up the boundaries, because that's where we're headed, for good and ill.
Obviously, I agree with you on our innate need to create art; as far as I can understand my own impulses to create and project them onto any other creator's, we create art because it's our process of understanding the world without through the world within. We absorb something, we refract it inwards, and we release it shot through with our own light to hopefully do the same for anyone else who experiences it.
The thing is, this isn't necessarily exclusive to human beings - as in, while there's a perfunctory philosophical issue at play with intentionality and sentience, a network that does not give the same output every time for the same input has the spark of something new, something closer to the way our brains work, and that means we're heading into greyer areas where the definitions we hold become murkier. It's a mistake to dismiss this out of hand, because as Cipheron mentioned (good posts, by the way), we can always redefine the goalposts to exclude machine-created art as 'not art' even if they start displaying things like a thought process. To some degree, the AI is doing what we do, which is to process information and manipulate it in a way that's desired. The current difference is the machine itself does not create the desire, we do. And as far as I can tell, that is not impossible to change given enough time, or at least to simulate the apparent existence of one.
And then we hit The Chinese Room issue, and all the goodness of where the truly heady stuff of sci-fi from the past is now imminent. I'm both excited and cynical about it, because reality is always simultaneously overwhelming and underwhelming.
PigLick on 10/12/2022 at 14:04
the thing is with music, although its ultimately maths, the performance side of things is incredibly hard to emulate. The physical manipulation of an instrument is beyond what AI can do right now.
Cipheron on 10/12/2022 at 22:32
Quote Posted by PigLick
the thing is with music, although its ultimately maths, the performance side of things is incredibly hard to emulate. The physical manipulation of an instrument is beyond what AI can do right now.
That's mostly due to the type of data people are putting into music generators. If you feed a ton of sheet music in, you're going to get sheet music out the other end, then you attach that to some MIDI sampler and play the resulting song. So it's limited by the fact that you're using existing MIDI instrument banks.
To have an AI create instrument mappings, you need a bunch of sheet music, then to get real humans to play their instruments, and record that. The reason this is more difficult than image generation isn't because it's harder for the AI, but because audio is fundamentally a time-based phenomena, and images aren't. So it's just slow and expensive to get the needed data in the first place.
Qooper on 10/12/2022 at 23:28
Quote Posted by Sulphur
Obviously, I agree with you on our innate need to create art; as far as I can understand my own impulses to create and project them onto any other creator's, we create art because it's our process of understanding the world without through the world within. We absorb something, we refract it inwards, and we release it shot through with our own light to hopefully do the same for anyone else who experiences it.
Not all people are artistic, but those who are, I'm sure there are many reasons why people make art. I create because I have no choice. If I didn't, I'd regret not fulfilling my purpose. Some of what I do takes most of its form before the actual making, almost like construction, and some of the art takes shape almost by itself, kind of like a dance that goes where it goes. I'm aware that it matters what I feed my imagination, which is why I'm critical of what's actually good.
Quote:
It's a mistake to dismiss this out of hand, because as Cipheron mentioned (good posts, by the way), we can always redefine the goalposts to exclude machine-created art as 'not art' even if they start displaying things like a thought process. To some degree, the AI is doing what we do, which is to process information and manipulate it in a way that's desired. The current difference is the machine itself does not create the desire, we do.
There's a degree to which art, and particularly its quality, can be called an objective thing, if by art we mean the kind that takes skill and hard work to master. Ideas alone are cheap. It's the execution of a great idea that matters. Most contemporary art is just an idea slapped together by someone who doesn't respect this aforementioned reality. From this perspective, I still think there are ways AI can be used as a tool for great works of art, but it'll be more than giving a prompt and calling it done. If Michelangelo had to learn how to use a brush and how light works to give form to his ideas, to what great lengths will artists today go in order to paint with AI?
EDIT: On further thought, what I think is important in creating good art is control, and using an AI you lose that. But for creating reference images and sketches AI is clearly a great tool.
