Porean
1yr ago
I see it as a herald for things to come. Perhaps you feel that furries are scum and deserve what's coming for them. That's all well and good, but the broader point to be read lies in the topic of job displacement in general.
"AI workers replace humans" used to be a prediction, not an accurate description of current reality. We now have (or are on the brink of having) a successful demonstration of just that. The reactions and policies and changes that arrive from the current ongoing chaos are going to set precedent for future battles involving first-world job replacement, and I am personally very interested in seeing what kind of slogans and parties and perhaps even extremism emerges from our first global experiment.
Porean
1yr ago
I agreed with the gist of the article, but I can't help but wonder if this topic was 99% covered by LW at some point.
Porean
1yr ago
Completely true. Current advances do not guarantee the "no more jobs" dystopia many predict. My excitement is likely primarily a result of how much I've involved myself in observing this specific little burst of technological displacement.
Porean
1yr ago
I feel we are talking past each other. "In terms of the historical narrative, some artists were inspired by photography and made a cool synthesis of traditional art && the new technology" -- okay. But were there more artists (adjusting for base rate) creating realistic looking hand-drawn art pieces before or after the proliferation of the camera? Do you agree that the answer is before? Do you grasp the standard concerns shared amongst artists that believe before is the obvious answer?
Porean
1yr ago
I am not aware of a single high-quality AI image of two people having sex.
This does exist, but you are right to point out it is exceedingly difficult to make.
Given the volume of responses affirming the failures of generated porn, I'm realising my tastes must've bubbled me from dissent. I mostly consume images with only 1 figure involved && this has evidently biased my thinking.
Porean
1yr ago
I don't see this as superstitious/magical. You are basically pressing the "purge all thoughts" button by spamming your brain with a single repeated concept.
Porean
1yr ago
Why do you care about what/who's fault it is? You have goals -- accomplish them or don't.
Porean
1yr ago
Your post made sense to me, but I think that's a result of me agreeing with 90% of it. It might help if you broke up your stream of consciousness into proper paragraphs and subpoints.
Porean
1yr ago
I've yet to see anyone blow up their life with (legal) porn,
What kind of observation would qualify, to you? Does blowing your life savings on OnlyFans count? Missing a national exam because you fell asleep after a jack at dawn? Ending up arrested for molestation because you thought it'd be as easy?
I don't even care about any of these, because they're edge cases. But when people are willing to condemn all kinds of behaviours except masturbation, I just don't get it.
Porean
1yr ago
The main concern here is that we're headed for a future where all media and all human interaction is generated by AI simulations, which would be a hellish dystopia. We don't want things to just feel good - we want to know that there's another conscious entity on the other end of the line.
I can see this as a Future Problem, but right now the "conscious entity on the other end" are simply prompt writers. There is a sense of community to be gained from indulging and working on AI generation together. I think it is misleading to apply the bugman/we-will-be-in-pod argument to text-to-image tools, because new means of human interaction are forming as a result of it.
Also, some of us just hate the majority of conscious entities and are happier with what simulations we can get. This obviously doesn't apply to you or Vaush, but I wonder what brings you both to so viciously condemn the estranged, the alienated, the anti-social.
Porean
1yr ago
The comments on the youtube video seem to suggest that this song is actually serious and not a parody,
What comments are you reading? I saw mostly references to freedom truckers, lockdown protestors, and "G-d". Looks right-wing to me.
Porean
1yr ago
Premise #2: Within the unit of people we care about, we care about everyone equally.
I think this premise specifically is inherently anti-utilitarian. How can you assign the same utility to each individual when there's so much variance? When the actions and roles and beliefs and experiences of two people can differ so greatly?
Porean
1yr ago
Leave the rest of the internet at the door.
Or could you at least have something more substantial to talk about than, "redditors upvote dumb shit, news at 11"?
Porean
1yr ago
https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/open-thread-243
Certified hoax. Quokkas shocked.
Porean
1yr ago
Sizzle50's various posts on BLM were really great, but I think everyone here has discussed that to death.
Instead, I'll link SayingAndUnsaying's longpost on Hawaiian Racial Dynamics, which will be new & novel for a lot more readers.
Porean
1yr ago
Misogynist (in the feminist sense) would be more accurate. There is zero mention of anything related to getting laid.
Porean
1yr ago
Start a substack. Please. Perfection is the enemy of good, and you are really good.
Porean
1yr ago
NO WAY, you were real?
Porean
1yr ago
Why are the majority programmers so enthusiastic about machines that can code but not artists?
Because they aren't. They're collectively deluding themselves into believing in the «soul» and that programming will never be automated by AI. Just like certain artists are.
I am a programmer. OpenAI scares me. I'm putting every effort I've got into the Grind, because I think the industry's due for a phenomenal crash that'll leave the majority in the dumps. You are free to disagree.
Porean
1yr ago
If it does then it will be smart enough to self-modify,
This does not work out the way you think it will. A p99-human tier parallelised unaligned coding AI will be able to do the work of any programmer, will be able to take down most online infrastructure by merit of security expertise, but won't be sufficient for a Skynet Uprising, because that AI still needs to solve for the "getting out of the digital box and building a robot army" part.
If the programming AI was a generalised intelligence, then of course we'd be all fucked immediately. But that's not how this works. What we have are massive language models that are pretty good at tackling any kind of request that involves text generation. Solve for forgetfulness in transformer models and you'll only need one dude to maintain that full stack app instead of 50.
Is there something misleading with the way I phrased my comment? I don't understand why multiple people have succeeded in reading "programmers will be completely replaced by AI" into my words.
And this isn't a nitpicking thing. It is an extremely important distinction; I see this in the same way as the Pareto Principle. The AI labs are going to quickly churn out models good enough to cover 95% of the work the average software engineer does, and the programming community will reach a depressive state where everyone's viciously competing for that last 5% until true AGI arrives.
Your first paragraph misses how hard it is for human programmers to achieve those things, if it is even possible under current circumstances (find me a program that can acquire farmland & construct robots for it & harvest everything & prepare meals from raw materials). Even hiring an army of programmers (AI or no) would not satisfy the preconditions necessary for getting your own food supply, namely having an actual physical presence. You need to step beyond distributed human-level abilities into superhuman AI turf for that to happen.
Porean
1yr ago
Roughly speaking, I see your point and agree that it's possible we're just climbing a step further up on an infinite ladder of "things to do with computers".
But I disagree that it's the most likely outcome, because:
-
I think the continued expansion of the domain space for individual programmers can be partially attributed to Moore's Law. More Is Different; a JavaScript equivalent could've easily been developed in the 80s but simply wasn't because there wasn't enough computational slack at the time for a sandboxed garbage collected asyncronous scripting language to run complex enterprise graphical applications. Without the regular growth in computational power, I expect innovations to slow.
-
Cognitive limits. Say a full stack developer gets to finish their work in 10% of the time. Okay, now what? Are they going to spin up a completely different project? Make a fuzzer, a GAN, an SAT solver, all for fun? The future ability of AI tools to spin up entire codebases on demand does not help in the human learning process of figuring out what actually needs to be done. And if someone makes a language model to fix that problem, then domain knowledge becomes irrelevant and everyone (and thus no one) becomes a programmer.
-
I think, regardless of AI, that the industry is oversaturated and due for mass layoffs. There are currently weak trends pointing in this direction, but I wouldn't blame anyone for continuing to bet on its growth.
I can't draw conclusions without knowing what kind of degenerate you are. If you're into hentai, the waifu diffusion model was trained on the 1.4 SD checkpoint && has much room for improvement. If you're a furry, fine-tuned models are currently a WIP and will be available soon. If you're a normal dude, I don't really understand because I honestly think it's good enough at this point.
The only thing I think is really poorly covered at the moment is obscure fetish content. A more complicated mixture of fine-tuning + textual inversion might be needed there, but I do truly believe the needs of >>50% of coomers are satisfiable by machines at this point.
Edit: I am less confident of my conclusion now.
More options
Context Copy link