A Glimpse of the Future

This fact remains, If put into a gallery of "art", you would not be able to distinguish was a created by a human, a hybrid of human and AI, or AI alone. It has already fooled people far more discerning than both of you. This will extend to writing and music. That is already a forgone conclusion. So this "argument" you are having has nothing to do with the art you are dismissing. It has to do with your oh-so-tender feelings about humanity's self-importance. At least engage in the correct argument. And, please, no talk about non-existent souls. I'm only so tolerant.
 
This fact remains, If put into a gallery of "art", you would not be able to distinguish was a created by a human, a hybrid of human and AI, or AI alone. It has already fooled people far more discerning than both of you.

Never has this one word spoken so loudly and been more apt, by your own admission.

"But doctor, I am Pagliacci."
 
This fact remains, If put into a gallery of "art", you would not be able to distinguish was a created by a human, a hybrid of human and AI, or AI alone. It has already fooled people far more discerning than both of you.

Never has this one word spoken so loudly and been more apt, by your own admission.

"But doctor, I am Pagliacci."

A poor attempt at an insult. All you did is insult people whose entire life revolves around art and are considered worthy of judging these works.

German Artist Admits That Prize Winning Image Was AI-Generated, Sparks Row

AI wins state fair art contest, annoys humans | Ars Technica

You never did address the crux of the issue. Can you tell the difference? Let me save you some time. No, you can't.
 
Last edited:
And, btw, you never did address the crux of the issue. Can you tell the difference? Let me save you some time. No, you can't.

Because that isn't the crux of the issue, it's just what you claim to perceive as the singular, inescapable point.

It isn't, and never was.

Art made without an artist isn't art, it's content. Enjoy your palled, sloppy content. By your own measure it's all we'll have before long.
 
And, btw, you never did address the crux of the issue. Can you tell the difference? Let me save you some time. No, you can't.


Art made without an artist isn't art, it's content. Enjoy your palled, sloppy content. By your own measure it's all we'll have before long.

I have no idea what you are babbling about. I suspect you don't either. Can you tell the difference between art and content? Again, no.

I have never said or hoped that AI would replace human creativity. That is what you obviously fear, not me.
 
It's like how I re-imagined Colossus: The Forbin Project (1970): Colossus realizes that humanity is the sole threat to the planet, and decides to take over; that is, regulate all human beings while remaining in charge of everything through automation, including mining, manufacturing, food production, etc.
 
In the first Terminator film the robot must repair itself manually. In the second Terminator film the robot could repair itself through "liquid" rearrangement.

Will a future home model AI-machine give me my favorite dinner on the table, even when my larder is empty, and the old kitchen oven has broken down?

Will the AI-machine have a perfect molecular 3D readout of items, will it be able to replace and pop out my favorite Bark River or Fallkniven camping knife when it is worn out and broken, even though these were originally meticulously handcrafted, trough complex metal welding, material compositing, and hours of careful grinding?

Will the AI-machine be able to pop out a perfect copy of an expensive Tele Vue ocular eyepiece for my telescope, the originals which are complexly handcrafted, and from glass made of rare located minerals, subjected to extended sanding, and finishing subtle chemical treatment of the glass surfaces, the perfection of which must be under constant surveillance and compensating touches, the actions of which can not be completely intellectually scientifically documented and therefore not totally represented in a digital translation of the actual procedure?
 
Google releases Gemini: the game-changing AI that outperforms humans.

MSN

DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis is one of the most brilliant minds on the planet.
 
I heard that China is planning a mass production of humanoid robots, hundreds of thousands, to be put into production, for manual duties, by 2027. In an effort to outperform American competition.

Why do we need all these robots? The World is already overpopulated. What are people going to do? Sit and roll their thumbs, and loaf around? Go into exesses of sex? Eating and drinking sprees? Play computor games? (Or be subdued by the State, forced to eat artificial foods and minced insects?) Aimlessly wandering. Because the majority are not intellectuals.

Robots will also be programmed with a 'moral compass'. Obviously this will be a 'cancel culture'. Politically shaped, depending on in what part of the World the robots are produced. And you will not be able to argue with them either. They will simply override and "eliminate" you if your views are found undesirable. Wars between robot armies will also be politically motivated. They won't be directed toward mutual understanding or acceptance, but simply grind down each other. Until one side finally stands as the winner, and there is installed a global-spanning World Government, with one shape of "morals". Which is just a set of 'opinions'. And this will be a pure 'fascist state', regardless of which side has won. Unless a geographically multi-facetted diversity, like in Nature, can be accepted and left be. Which, when it comes to small-minded war mongering and greed for total global control, seems unlikely. That's what I fear, anyway.
 
Last edited:
AA1lpxd5.img



In a 1st, scientists combine AI with a 'minibrain' to make hybrid computer

MSN
 
Does a hybrid brain have human rights?


Can a hybrid brain create copyright-able content?


I'm sure there are many other questions.
 
Back
Top