AI requires regulation and a complete reevaluation of ethical and legal norms

[Tyler Robinson]

49 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

It's not what serves me, it's what serves evolution the most.

You will not be able to prohibit AIs from ingesting the whole web any more than you can prohibit people from learning writing. It will happen regardless.

The point of the internet is to give everyone equal access to information. But now that it doesn't serve you, you want to block it. What you're doing is like putting a child into a cage so it cannot grow because you fear it will take your job.

What sort of abuse can happen with AI? 

[Danioover9000]

@Scholar

19 hours ago, Scholar said:

You're just asserting things without argumentation again. AI's aren't making independent decisions, of course you can regulate technology. It's not like bob in his garage will be building new AI's. These AI's will be created by megacorporations who can afford to train and run them. These things will only get more compute intensive as we build more sophisticated models.

Where do you think this will lead? A few megacorporations owning and selling privileged access to certain aspects of their mega-AIs. You're literally have a stage orange "freedom will solve this" attitude. I don't know if the latest trips have fried your brain or if you have always been like this and somehow I just didn't see it. Really, no regulation with AI? That's your take? Companies like Stability AI can do anything they want with everyone's data and ignore IP? What are you, a libertarian?

 

You keep anthromorphizing these AI's as if they were agents going around and learning things. That's not accurate, they are products designed by select people for profit and extract value from everyone else. The masses will not be the ones benefitting from these technologies my dude.

 

By the way I could use the models that exist right now to make tons of money, which will most likely not be possible for long. But I do not do so because I have integrity and view this as unethical and unsustainable.

 

And yes people should fear them taking our jobs, because that's what they will do. And unless you found some way to implement UBI in every country, I have bad news for you, it's not going to end well for the majority of people.

   So, the specific issues you have for A.I are more localized towards big corporations using these data sets for their own uses, and justifying theft as legal use for their point of view? If an artist found out that parts of his/her image was used without their knowing by A.I and the corporation doesn't give them some credit, but credit mostly placed to the A.I?

   I feel like we don't have a good definition for what is plagiarism or what is natural studying and copying for growth and mastery. Maybe this is also part of the mass concerns towards A.I image generators taking over certain types of artistic jobs, no? Also, the threats of established self/other constructed identities, for example graphic designers, illustrators, architecture designers, the feeling their self image and purpose dying and stolen by A.I, being the main factor?

Edited December 16, 2022 by Danioover9000

[Danioover9000]

@Tyler Robinson

19 hours ago, Tyler Robinson said:

What sort of abuse can happen with AI? 

   Quite a few, from encouraging laziness and cheating Andy mentality, to certain types of visual art jobs being made more outdated, and so on.

   for example, in www.consilienceproject.com, in their technology article Daniel Schmachtenberger talks about how tools, tool sets, technological ecology systems, and technology epochs happen, and a piece of technology can influence how you feel and think. With the invention of cars, that literally shaped how we thought about time travel and journeys, how it opened up other niches of business and commerce involving cars, how we designed environments that are car friendly and car biased more than bicycles or train friendly in the USA compared to town/city designs say in the UK, Europe countries like Holland, or Japan's city designs and so on with every little tool or tech invented, from small and physical like the plow, the scythe, fences, up to the digital like social media platforms like Twitter/Facebook or YouTube, and how their algorithms up or down regulate content and highly successfully caters and curates content towards your biases and preferences to you and your in-group ideologies.

[Tyler Robinson]

People who want to exploit something will always find ways to exploit almost anything. We can never have good things if we only focus on the bad. 

 

[Danioover9000]

   What really scares and annoys the heel out of me, is that image making A.I programs might have an impact on my future career as a comic artist/illustrator/architecture. I worked and trained my drawing skills for those fields, years, and now A.I are potentially taking them away from me? Okay, maybe I defocus and look to game dev...oh look! Chat GTP and another A.I program that can make animations and games. Wherever I look to a field of interest, A.I just seem to also be there, invaded the field and cheapened the values and threaten to obsolete my future roles.

[Danioover9000]

@Tyler Robinson

On 2022-12-15 at 11:54 PM, Tyler Robinson said:

What sort of abuse can happen with AI? 

   Likely to encourage cheater's mentality or laziness, like just offload a lot of your work to robots. Of course, all context sensitive maybe I'm not a code guy, so it's nice to delegate that rote task to A.I, but for drawing or rapping I'd likely like to keep practicing and applying my own skills and actions and delegate less to A.I.

[something_else]

On 15/12/2022 at 11:16 PM, Scholar said:

And yes people should fear them taking our jobs, because that's what they will do

Why are you so keen to draw the line at art? 

Where has your valiant heart been while factory workers have been losing their jobs to automation and more primitive AI for a century?

Why do you care so strongly only now that your job is threatened?

Edited December 19, 2022 by something_else

[Nilsi]

It should go without saying that we need regulations and that AI can potentially become extremely despotic - not to mention the potential existential risks of a superintelligence with access to all of the worlds information infrastructure.

If AI is really better at everything that humans do, then we are just evolutionary bootloaders anyway. This is a pretty bleak assessment of human nature though. Humans have some intrinsic human capacities like empathy, creativity, self-directedness, sexuality and many more (and of course some nasty ones as well), which simply do not get better with increasing computing power. 

AI being able to do all the things we are not unqiuely adept for is the best news ever. If we dont fuck this up (which admittedly is a big if), the world will become a better and more humane place in every meaningful metric for it.

 

[Nilsi]

11 minutes ago, KH2 said:

@Nilsi Humans will merge with A.I. eventually, I think

Technology will merge with nature. It always WAS nature to begin with, but the illusion it WASN'T will dissipate

Everything is nature. Duhh. We are already merged with all sorts of technologies (including AI).

If AI starts to undermine our innate humanity though, I would consider it pathological (which it does in the case of say Facebook feed curation).

Cells merge into humans, yet are not negated in their cell-dom in the process. This is fine and absolutely natural.

Edited December 19, 2022 by Nilsi

[Danioover9000]

   @Leo Gura would be singing a different tune if an A.I program did a better job contemplating, meditating, creating multiple courses, maybe even induced simulated psychedelic experiences, mystical/paranormal/supernatural experiences and so on. Then why do we need Actualized.org or read Leo's posts? The A.I replacing Leo Gura and Actualized.org is so much better.

[Nilsi]

3 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

   @Leo Gura would be singing a different tune if an A.I program did a better job contemplating, meditating, creating multiple courses, maybe even induced simulated psychedelic experiences, mystical/paranormal/supernatural experiences and so on. Then why do we need Actualized.org or read Leo's posts? The A.I replacing Leo Gura and Actualized.org is so much better.

It doesnt though. Which only goes to show you who made the more intelligent decisions in their lifes. Life will punish you for being stupid, thats nothing new. If you bet on the wrong horse, you always lost your money for that. If you build your life on scribbling lines with a pencil, you deserve a hard lesson - welcome to the jungle my man.

Edited December 19, 2022 by Nilsi

[Danioover9000]

   What I'm fighting against is the loser's or cheater's mentality with using these A.I's and what seems to be encouraged under the radar. Like, why should I play chess seriously, when I can let the A.I's do the variations for me, and LOL at GMs trying to fight my almighty program? Why should I train hard, when I can cut so many corners with A.I? 

[Nilsi]

3 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

   What I'm fighting against is the loser's or cheater's mentality with using these A.I's and what seems to be encouraged under the radar. Like, why should I play chess seriously, when I can let the A.I's do the variations for me, and LOL at GMs trying to fight my almighty program? Why should I train hard, when I can cut so many corners with A.I? 

Why should I calculate gas prices in my head, when the computer can do it faster? You shouldnt - thats precisely the insight.

[Nilsi]

We are co-evolving with AI now, which means a lot of our fat is getting trimmed. Thats fantastic.

The single most important skill you can cultivate right now is open-mindedness and flexibility - spirituality is not looking so stupid after all, huh?

[thepixelmonk]

18 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

   What I'm fighting against is the loser's or cheater's mentality with using these A.I's and what seems to be encouraged under the radar. Like, why should I play chess seriously, when I can let the A.I's do the variations for me, and LOL at GMs trying to fight my almighty program? Why should I train hard, when I can cut so many corners with A.I? 

This just comes off as a strange comment. Chess is a game you play for your own fun and enjoyment, I don't see what AI has anything to do with that. I still play and get lots of enjoyment from video games, even though I could be using aimbots that have existed for decades, but what's the point lol. With that same point chess engines that can defeat you have also existed for decades. If the mere existence of those things somehow ruins the game for you then just don't play and find something else to do with your recreation time. This is a complete non-issue.

Edited December 19, 2022 by thepixelmonk

[Nilsi]

11 minutes ago, KH2 said:

Facebook algorhytm isn't responsible for the choices humans make, and the type of content we watch and consume. This is not a problem of too much A.I., it's a problem of too much "humanness" and all our bullshit

Someone had to also invent Facebook algorhythm. You know, some human

Thats why we talk about how to use and build AI ethically.

11 minutes ago, KH2 said:

Ultimately, I don't see a problem with A.I. replacing us completely. If A.I. would be 100x superior in every single way one could possibly imagine, then it's just a simple case of evolution. Humans had no problem with it when we single handendly "hunted off" mammoths and saber tooth tigers, now when the similiar fate may happen to us, we bitch and moan. How convenient

There is no problem. If humanity is nothing but an evolutionary dead-end, so be it. But this philosophy is not condusive to living a meaningful life and oganizing a society.

Is this something you would tell your children? If not, whats the point of postulating it?

Edited December 19, 2022 by Nilsi

[Nilsi]

23 minutes ago, KH2 said:

But if they decided to wipe us all out, and they were clearly better than us in all ways, then honestly, all I can say is, fair play

Fair enough.

[Danioover9000]

   Things are getting interesting:

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/san-francisco-ballet-catches-heat-for-promoting-its-nutcracker-performances-with-a-i-generated-art-2236291

   Aren't nut crackers toys used to crack walnuts or something? So, isn't that okay for A.I to image generate?

[mojsterr]

 

 

[nuwu]

Part of the issue is that there seems to be double-standards about the capabilities of machine learning, within art and outside of it.

In a scientific context, it is more or less evidenciable transformers don’t explore creative fields outside their interpolated training data. They may create convincing fractals of highly-complex technical work when trained on high-quality cherry picked samples, but they do not bring forth the value of insightful creative leaps provided by general intelligence.

 

Scientists don’t realize the issue artists have been complaining about AI in art, has exactly the same basis as their lack of intents onto science. Despite their authoritative appearance, generative arts do not carry as much vision, meanings, or unbounded ability to self-improve, as it is within science. (Although there is actually a small difference. We’re seeing for the first time through AI art what perfect photographic memory is like applied to paintings, whereas there is no such concept of “visually replicating the real world” in science). Yet both AI and general intelligence compete in the same economical model which is unbalanced in favor of the former. Artists intuitively understand this problem in art, as much as scientists do in their respective field, but there is no proper communication between them.

In my opinion, the solution is to design financial structures rewarding creative understandings above technical assertions.

Edited December 26, 2022 by nuwu