machines won’t replace us
exploring this theme broadly. for now, collecting raw material.
machines won’t replace us
None of this is to imply that human beings should repudiate the technologies that make us more efficient. We just have to recognize which needs greater quantity can meet, and which it cannot. For example, AI chatbots cannot meet the need for intimacy. LLMs cannot meet the need for creativity. AI-generated art cannot meet the need for aesthetic... See more
via Charles Eisenstein
Art is defined by intentionality, and we ought to view “AI art” as an interaction between humans and machines versus ascribing to a computer agency that does not exist.
As Donald Knuth put it: “Ai has by now succeeded in doing essentially everything that requires ‘thinking’ but has failed to do most of what people and animals do without thinking …”
What do we have left that is ours and ours alone? Sensorimotor skills that are all but automatic, yes. Consciousness, yes. Emotions. Instinct. Appetites, impulses and... See more
What do we have left that is ours and ours alone? Sensorimotor skills that are all but automatic, yes. Consciousness, yes. Emotions. Instinct. Appetites, impulses and... See more
Right now, people totally misunderstand what AI is. They see it as a tiger. A tiger is dangerous. It might eat me. It’s an adversary. And there’s danger in water, too — you can drown in it — but the danger of a flowing river of water is very different to the danger of a tiger. Water is dangerous, yes, but you can also swim in it, you can make
... See moreThe Verge • “An engine for the imagination”: an interview with David Holz, CEO of AI image generator Midjourney
LLMs and all such products tend to converge: on styles, on forms, on patterns; the “sameness” isn’t incidental, it’s actually core to what these technologies do, how they work; they will always have this quality; this quality is their modus operandi, really! There is no world in which LLMs write interesting things.
Humans care about what other
... See moreIt’s very exciting to see all the progress with agents. But we shouldn’t get swept away by the hype just yet. In most cases there will be a human in the loop for a while. Compounding errors are real and agents continue to need human guidance. Also inference costs are still high.
Dylan Fieldx.comI want to see more tools and fewer operated machines - we should be embracing our humanity instead of blindly improving efficiency. And that involves using our new AI technology in more deft ways than generating more content for humans to evaluate. I believe the real game changers are going to have very little to do with plain content generation.
... See moreAmelia Wattenberger • Why Chatbots Are Not the Future of Interfaces
When you don’t experience reality like most people do, it’s hard to make things that connect with most people.
AI, completely detached from reality, will have a hard time making things that connect with people.
Billy Oppenheimer • The Cup of Coffee Theory of AI
People keep asking me about AI and I really think how you feel about AI comes down to whether you believe art is about producing things (images, objects, data files, “content”) or about a way of operating in the world as an intellectual, spiritual, and emotional creature.