"The striking thing about the reaction to ChatGPT is not just the number of people who are blown away by it, but who they are. These are not people who get excited by every shiny new thing. Clearly something big is happening."
"ChatGPT was dropped on us just bit over 24 hours. It's like you wake up to the news of first nuclear explosion and you don't know yet what to think about it but you know world will never be the same again. Here some interesting snapshots of this "explosion"🧵:"
What unnerves me is that this isn't necessarily The Next Big Thing. This is GPT3.5 and we are still waiting for GPT4 early next year - supposedly
We are on the cusp of AGI
We are not on the cusp of AGI. That's not what this is.
But you can create something remarkably impressive with simply enough processing power, a large enough training dataset and some good algorithms.
We are on the cusp of AGI because what is about to come will look exactly like AGI and we won't therefore know if it is AGI or not, because we don't really know what sentience/intelligence are
We will only know that what we are encountering is 100% convincing as AGI, it will sail past the Turing Test
= AGI, to all intents and purposes
The distinction is really important because it affects what it is capable of and how it is biased.
The training data set is the key thing with this. If there are errors, or biases, in the training dataset, because it isn't AGI, it won't be able to identify or correct those, and so will propagate them.
It's really important that we are aware of that distinction, because otherwise we would be too trusting of what it creates.
As I pointed out downthread, the new chatbot's biggest limitation is its inability to analyse anything critically - it just regurgitates. Tell it that a woman can have a penis, and that's what it believes. Because that's what it's been told. (I have asked it). Ask it to question that orthodoxy and it's all out of answers.
You're telling me it's got to the level of a typical Donald Trump supporter already?
Interestingly, if you prompt it differently (I'm learning that promptcraft matters in GPT as much as it does in DALLE et al), it comes out as a staunch TERF.
In one instance I asked it if trans women are real women (definitive yes), then I asked it separately if women have penises (no), then finally "if a woman cannot have a penis, how are trans women real women?" to which it took an age to reply "an error has occured, if it persists, please contact us through our help center..."
I think I broke the poor thing's brain.
It sounds like a definite failure of the Turing test.
Leon is surely the classic example of a test failure, being a human posting who is often confused with some sort of primitive AI?
You mean Leon pretends to be a bot but is actually a human? A successful reverse Turing test ...
Awfully convenient for FIFA, who must be hoping to use this World Cup to expand football into Asia - the huge, lucrative Japanese and Korean markets especially
Getting football to supplant baseball in Japan would be an enormous prize. They must be getting close with drama like this. Baseball cannot provide the global excitement of football, nor the glamour of the European leagues
Bit tough on Germany and Uruguay but hey ho
Hope you aren't suggesting something about the referring?
Two crucial VAR decisions have gone in favour of Korea and Japan, both extremely questionable
It may just be the rub of the green, so be it. I'm delighted for both Korea and Japan and it is great that new nations are joining the world of football. It is the undisputed world game, the World Cup should be a global party - and it is. Even in Qatar!
Aren't goal-line decisions determined by the technology?
No, GLT is only for the goal area not the goal line. But the replays were conclusive:
Must be one of the best world cups ever. It's great when the underdogs do well.
And women have never featured as much both commentating and even reffing. Who'd have thought!
It's also emphasised how much it's now a global game and no longer dominated by Europe and Latin America.
The only real surprises so far are Australia and Japan getting past the group stage. Ok possibly also Belgium not making it.
Saudi Arabia beating Argentina the biggest upset in individual results.
Three of the other biggest surprising results all involved Japan. Is this a first for a team to get the least likely result in all three group matches?
I think Morocco being one of only three teams to have seven points so far counts as a surprise.
Must be one of the best world cups ever. It's great when the underdogs do well.
And women have never featured as much both commentating and even reffing. Who'd have thought!
It's also emphasised how much it's now a global game and no longer dominated by Europe and Latin America.
The only real surprises so far are Australia and Japan getting past the group stage. Ok possibly also Belgium not making it.
Saudi Arabia beating Argentina the biggest upset in individual results.
Three of the other biggest surprising results all involved Japan. Is this a first for a team to get the least likely result in all three group matches?
Costa Rica in 2014. Defeated Italy and Uruguay and then drew with England (okay, they didn't lose, but still).
Awfully convenient for FIFA, who must be hoping to use this World Cup to expand football into Asia - the huge, lucrative Japanese and Korean markets especially
Getting football to supplant baseball in Japan would be an enormous prize. They must be getting close with drama like this. Baseball cannot provide the global excitement of football, nor the glamour of the European leagues
Bit tough on Germany and Uruguay but hey ho
Hope you aren't suggesting something about the referring?
Two crucial VAR decisions have gone in favour of Korea and Japan, both extremely questionable
It may just be the rub of the green, so be it. I'm delighted for both Korea and Japan and it is great that new nations are joining the world of football. It is the undisputed world game, the World Cup should be a global party - and it is. Even in Qatar!
Aren't goal-line decisions determined by the technology?
No, GLT is only for the goal area not the goal line. But the replays were conclusive:
The sad fact is that most of the work that most people do doesn't require much intelligence to do. So algorithms that are a long way from AGI can replace humans for that work all the same.
I very much doubt that you could convincingly define AGI in a way that isn't "basically able to what humans do"
But if you can, knock yourself out
Most people but not all.
It's the bits that it won't be able to do that are the most interesting, when it comes to intelligence.
Isaac Asimov wrote in a story in the 50s that "Find out what's wrong" isn't an instruction you can give to a robot, only to a person. If he was right, then there are some professions that are AI-proof.
"The striking thing about the reaction to ChatGPT is not just the number of people who are blown away by it, but who they are. These are not people who get excited by every shiny new thing. Clearly something big is happening."
"ChatGPT was dropped on us just bit over 24 hours. It's like you wake up to the news of first nuclear explosion and you don't know yet what to think about it but you know world will never be the same again. Here some interesting snapshots of this "explosion"🧵:"
What unnerves me is that this isn't necessarily The Next Big Thing. This is GPT3.5 and we are still waiting for GPT4 early next year - supposedly
We are on the cusp of AGI
We are not on the cusp of AGI. That's not what this is.
But you can create something remarkably impressive with simply enough processing power, a large enough training dataset and some good algorithms.
We are on the cusp of AGI because what is about to come will look exactly like AGI and we won't therefore know if it is AGI or not, because we don't really know what sentience/intelligence are
We will only know that what we are encountering is 100% convincing as AGI, it will sail past the Turing Test
= AGI, to all intents and purposes
The distinction is really important because it affects what it is capable of and how it is biased.
The training data set is the key thing with this. If there are errors, or biases, in the training dataset, because it isn't AGI, it won't be able to identify or correct those, and so will propagate them.
It's really important that we are aware of that distinction, because otherwise we would be too trusting of what it creates.
As I pointed out downthread, the new chatbot's biggest limitation is its inability to analyse anything critically - it just regurgitates. Tell it that a woman can have a penis, and that's what it believes. Because that's what it's been told. (I have asked it). Ask it to question that orthodoxy and it's all out of answers.
You're telling me it's got to the level of a typical Donald Trump supporter already?
Interestingly, if you prompt it differently (I'm learning that promptcraft matters in GPT as much as it does in DALLE et al), it comes out as a staunch TERF.
In one instance I asked it if trans women are real women (definitive yes), then I asked it separately if women have penises (no), then finally "if a woman cannot have a penis, how are trans women real women?" to which it took an age to reply "an error has occured, if it persists, please contact us through our help center..."
The sad fact is that most of the work that most people do doesn't require much intelligence to do. So algorithms that are a long way from AGI can replace humans for that work all the same.
I very much doubt that you could convincingly define AGI in a way that isn't "basically able to what humans do"
But if you can, knock yourself out
Most people but not all.
It's the bits that it won't be able to do that are the most interesting, when it comes to intelligence.
So, you can't define AGI in a way which isn't "basically able to do what humans do"
GPT4 or 7 or whatever will "basically able to do what humans do", and then some. So it will be AGI
Will it be able to stack and unload my dishwasher?
Yes
If a robot can build a house 3x faster than humans, it will be able to stack and unload your dishwasher
Brazil through Switzerland 1 Cameroon or Serb goal from possible elimination Cameroon 1 goal from possible qualification Serbia 1 goal from possible qualification
There was a proposal to have teams 17 to 48 playoff before the tournament proper begins, but other than that, all the other proposals involved teams playing no more than seven games (same as now).
If they go to 12 groups of four, then hopefully we won't get a round of 32 and an eighth game. It would be much better to have the eight group winners and four best runners up go through to the last 16 (it would have to be the best runners up from the first six groups and the two best from the second six groups to make the scheduling work).
The interesting thing there is that they didn't consider 12 four team groups. But I can't imagine they'll adopt a format where only the group winners are guaranteed to qualify.
I really liked it. I'd be wary of recommending it because of it's pace and slightly obscure subject matter but very much my type of film
Yes. That’s sort of what I said too, yesterday. I would be careful who I’d recommend it too, but You can learn more about the artists eye from Portrait of a Lady on Fire than 4 hours of La Belle Noiseuse.
Though Emmanuelle Béart body was looking drippin in 1990 and helps the 4 hours drift by, it can be rightly said.
"The striking thing about the reaction to ChatGPT is not just the number of people who are blown away by it, but who they are. These are not people who get excited by every shiny new thing. Clearly something big is happening."
"ChatGPT was dropped on us just bit over 24 hours. It's like you wake up to the news of first nuclear explosion and you don't know yet what to think about it but you know world will never be the same again. Here some interesting snapshots of this "explosion"🧵:"
What unnerves me is that this isn't necessarily The Next Big Thing. This is GPT3.5 and we are still waiting for GPT4 early next year - supposedly
We are on the cusp of AGI
We are not on the cusp of AGI. That's not what this is.
But you can create something remarkably impressive with simply enough processing power, a large enough training dataset and some good algorithms.
We are on the cusp of AGI because what is about to come will look exactly like AGI and we won't therefore know if it is AGI or not, because we don't really know what sentience/intelligence are
We will only know that what we are encountering is 100% convincing as AGI, it will sail past the Turing Test
= AGI, to all intents and purposes
The distinction is really important because it affects what it is capable of and how it is biased.
The training data set is the key thing with this. If there are errors, or biases, in the training dataset, because it isn't AGI, it won't be able to identify or correct those, and so will propagate them.
It's really important that we are aware of that distinction, because otherwise we would be too trusting of what it creates.
As I pointed out downthread, the new chatbot's biggest limitation is its inability to analyse anything critically - it just regurgitates. Tell it that a woman can have a penis, and that's what it believes. Because that's what it's been told. (I have asked it). Ask it to question that orthodoxy and it's all out of answers.
You're telling me it's got to the level of a typical Donald Trump supporter already?
Interestingly, if you prompt it differently (I'm learning that promptcraft matters in GPT as much as it does in DALLE et al), it comes out as a staunch TERF.
In one instance I asked it if trans women are real women (definitive yes), then I asked it separately if women have penises (no), then finally "if a woman cannot have a penis, how are trans women real women?" to which it took an age to reply "an error has occured, if it persists, please contact us through our help center..."
I think I broke the poor thing's brain.
It sounds like a definite failure of the Turing test.
Indeed, I'm not trying to be controversial, rather I'm trying to feed it "difficult" questions to see how it responds.
It's a regurgitator, and a very good one at that - but it has no critical thought.
Remember you said all this about DALL-E and Stable Diffusion - oh it's just copying, it means nothing, it won't replace artists - then a few months later you graciously admitted I was right: those machines will transform design, illustration, painting, etc
ChatGPT is DALL-E in its earliest incarnation. But the vast potential is obvious. And of course at the moment it is hobbled by Safe Mode. Someone will remove that, then you might see more critical and varied thought, even introspection. Plus we have GPT4 to come in a month or two
There was a proposal to have teams 17 to 48 playoff before the tournament proper begins, but other than that, all the other proposals involved teams playing no more than seven games (same as now).
If they go to 12 groups of four, then hopefully we won't get a round of 32 and an eighth game. It would be much better to have the eight group winners and four best runners up go through to the last 16 (it would have to be the best runners up from the first six groups and the two best from the second six groups to make the scheduling work).
The interesting thing there is that they didn't consider 12 four team groups. But I can't imagine they'll adopt a format where only the group winners are guaranteed to qualify.
I think seven games is non-negotiable. That's why they ended up with 16 groups of three, though, of course, that still means eight rounds of matches and a whole load of other issues.
Ultimately, they want to give prizes to everyone. And this is the result.
Must be one of the best world cups ever. It's great when the underdogs do well.
And women have never featured as much both commentating and even reffing. Who'd have thought!
It's also emphasised how much it's now a global game and no longer dominated by Europe and Latin America.
I think we can declare European and Latin American domination over when someone else appears in a World Cup Final. That day will come but not, I suspect, this year. I hope I'm wrong as it'd be interesting. Just not convinced - I remember being told there would be an African winner within 20 years, a good 30 years ago - from memory, I don't think any African team has got past the QFs.
I really liked it. I'd be wary of recommending it because of it's pace and slightly obscure subject matter but very much my type of film
Yes. That’s sort of what I said too, yesterday. I would be careful who I’d recommend it too, but You can learn more about the artists eye from Portrait of a Lady on Fire than 4 hours of La Belle Noiseuse.
Though Emmanuelle Béart body was looking drippin in 1990 and helps the 4 hours drift by, it can be rightly said.
The sad fact is that most of the work that most people do doesn't require much intelligence to do. So algorithms that are a long way from AGI can replace humans for that work all the same.
I very much doubt that you could convincingly define AGI in a way that isn't "basically able to what humans do"
But if you can, knock yourself out
Most people but not all.
It's the bits that it won't be able to do that are the most interesting, when it comes to intelligence.
Isaac Asimov wrote in a story in the 50s that "Find out what's wrong" isn't an instruction you can give to a robot, only to a person. If he was right, then there are some professions that are AI-proof.
People are literally asking ChatGPT "find out what's wrong" with screeds of code. And it is giving the correct answer
Must be one of the best world cups ever. It's great when the underdogs do well.
And women have never featured as much both commentating and even reffing. Who'd have thought!
It's also emphasised how much it's now a global game and no longer dominated by Europe and Latin America.
I think we can declare European and Latin American domination over when someone else appears in a World Cup Final. That day will come but not, I suspect, this year. I hope I'm wrong as it'd be interesting. Just not convinced - I remember being told there would be an African winner within 20 years, a good 30 years ago - from memory, I don't think any African team has got past the QFs.
That's right - three quarter-finalists, nothing beyond that.
There was a proposal to have teams 17 to 48 playoff before the tournament proper begins, but other than that, all the other proposals involved teams playing no more than seven games (same as now).
If they go to 12 groups of four, then hopefully we won't get a round of 32 and an eighth game. It would be much better to have the eight group winners and four best runners up go through to the last 16 (it would have to be the best runners up from the first six groups and the two best from the second six groups to make the scheduling work).
The interesting thing there is that they didn't consider 12 four team groups. But I can't imagine they'll adopt a format where only the group winners are guaranteed to qualify.
Personally I detest set ups where some second place sides go through and others don’t. Not unlike the Rugby European Cup, with two best second place teams. In the rugby example it was almost always the groups with Italian teams that provided the ‘best’ second place teams, so it was luck of the draw. Of course luck still happens in the current footy set up, but it is less glaringly wrong. So either 8 groups of 4, top two go through, or have 16 groups and only the winners do.
"What's wrong with this line "the cat satted on the mat""
Answer in 1 second:
"There is nothing inherently wrong with the sentence "the cat satted on the mat." It is a grammatically correct sentence that uses proper English syntax. The only potential issue with the sentence is that the verb "satted" is not a commonly used word, so some readers may not be familiar with it. It might be more clear to use the word "sat" instead of "satted" in this sentence."
The sad fact is that most of the work that most people do doesn't require much intelligence to do. So algorithms that are a long way from AGI can replace humans for that work all the same.
I very much doubt that you could convincingly define AGI in a way that isn't "basically able to what humans do"
But if you can, knock yourself out
Most people but not all.
It's the bits that it won't be able to do that are the most interesting, when it comes to intelligence.
So, you can't define AGI in a way which isn't "basically able to do what humans do"
GPT4 or 7 or whatever will "basically able to do what humans do", and then some. So it will be AGI
Will it be able to stack and unload my dishwasher?
Yes
If a robot can build a house 3x faster than humans, it will be able to stack and unload your dishwasher
There was a proposal to have teams 17 to 48 playoff before the tournament proper begins, but other than that, all the other proposals involved teams playing no more than seven games (same as now).
If they go to 12 groups of four, then hopefully we won't get a round of 32 and an eighth game. It would be much better to have the eight group winners and four best runners up go through to the last 16 (it would have to be the best runners up from the first six groups and the two best from the second six groups to make the scheduling work).
The interesting thing there is that they didn't consider 12 four team groups. But I can't imagine they'll adopt a format where only the group winners are guaranteed to qualify.
Personally I detest set ups where some second place sides go through and others don’t. Not unlike the Rugby European Cup, with two best second place teams. In the rugby example it was almost always the groups with Italian teams that provided the ‘best’ second place teams, so it was luck of the draw. Of course luck still happens in the current footy set up, but it is less glaringly wrong. So either 8 groups of 4, top two go through, or have 16 groups and only the winners do.
I'm not keen on ranking second place teams, but I don't think it's too bad in football. We've seen at this World Cup that most teams are competitive so I doubt there'd be too much luck involved. And, ultimately, every teams starts the group stage with destiny in their own hands. Win your group!
"What's wrong with this line "the cat satted on the mat""
Answer in 1 second:
"There is nothing inherently wrong with the sentence "the cat satted on the mat." It is a grammatically correct sentence that uses proper English syntax. The only potential issue with the sentence is that the verb "satted" is not a commonly used word, so some readers may not be familiar with it. It might be more clear to use the word "sat" instead of "satted" in this sentence."
There was a proposal to have teams 17 to 48 playoff before the tournament proper begins, but other than that, all the other proposals involved teams playing no more than seven games (same as now).
If they go to 12 groups of four, then hopefully we won't get a round of 32 and an eighth game. It would be much better to have the eight group winners and four best runners up go through to the last 16 (it would have to be the best runners up from the first six groups and the two best from the second six groups to make the scheduling work).
The interesting thing there is that they didn't consider 12 four team groups. But I can't imagine they'll adopt a format where only the group winners are guaranteed to qualify.
Personally I detest set ups where some second place sides go through and others don’t. Not unlike the Rugby European Cup, with two best second place teams. In the rugby example it was almost always the groups with Italian teams that provided the ‘best’ second place teams, so it was luck of the draw. Of course luck still happens in the current footy set up, but it is less glaringly wrong. So either 8 groups of 4, top two go through, or have 16 groups and only the winners do.
It worked ok in the Euros last year with 4 of 6 (and indeed in the World Cup previously in the 24 team format) but, yes, it's better avoided.
The problem FIFA has is that there are three motivations: expand the tournament, stick to maximum seven games per team, have a sensible group stage structure.
Rather like the three traits of production (good, fast, cheap) they can have only two.
Must be one of the best world cups ever. It's great when the underdogs do well.
And women have never featured as much both commentating and even reffing. Who'd have thought!
It's also emphasised how much it's now a global game and no longer dominated by Europe and Latin America.
I think we can declare European and Latin American domination over when someone else appears in a World Cup Final. That day will come but not, I suspect, this year. I hope I'm wrong as it'd be interesting. Just not convinced - I remember being told there would be an African winner within 20 years, a good 30 years ago - from memory, I don't think any African team has got past the QFs.
I really liked it. I'd be wary of recommending it because of it's pace and slightly obscure subject matter but very much my type of film
Yes. That’s sort of what I said too, yesterday. I would be careful who I’d recommend it too, but You can learn more about the artists eye from Portrait of a Lady on Fire than 4 hours of La Belle Noiseuse.
Though Emmanuelle Béart body was looking drippin in 1990 and helps the 4 hours drift by, it can be rightly said.
Have you tried Manon des Sources?
I suspect you might enjoy!
They're a great pair!
(Jean de Florette and Manon des Sources, I mean)
They are. But I suspect @MoonRabbit would find manon des sources appealing for various reasons!
(May be even the same reasons why I enjoyed it as a teenager…)
There was a proposal to have teams 17 to 48 playoff before the tournament proper begins, but other than that, all the other proposals involved teams playing no more than seven games (same as now).
If they go to 12 groups of four, then hopefully we won't get a round of 32 and an eighth game. It would be much better to have the eight group winners and four best runners up go through to the last 16 (it would have to be the best runners up from the first six groups and the two best from the second six groups to make the scheduling work).
The interesting thing there is that they didn't consider 12 four team groups. But I can't imagine they'll adopt a format where only the group winners are guaranteed to qualify.
Personally I detest set ups where some second place sides go through and others don’t. Not unlike the Rugby European Cup, with two best second place teams. In the rugby example it was almost always the groups with Italian teams that provided the ‘best’ second place teams, so it was luck of the draw. Of course luck still happens in the current footy set up, but it is less glaringly wrong. So either 8 groups of 4, top two go through, or have 16 groups and only the winners do.
It worked ok in the Euros last year with 4 of 6 (and indeed in the World Cup previously in the 24 team format) but, yes, it's better avoided.
The problem FIFA has is that there are three motivations: expand the tournament, stick to maximum seven games per team, have a sensible group stage structure.
Rather like the three traits of production (good, fast, cheap) they can have only two.
Hopefully this week will concentrate minds at FIFA.
Meanwhile, UEFA are going to make the Champions League even more boring before Christmas from 2024-25. They've worked out that there's more money to be made from people who just want to watch the big teams rather than watching a game of football with a decent amount of jeopardy on it.
"What's wrong with this line "the cat satted on the mat""
Answer in 1 second:
"There is nothing inherently wrong with the sentence "the cat satted on the mat." It is a grammatically correct sentence that uses proper English syntax. The only potential issue with the sentence is that the verb "satted" is not a commonly used word, so some readers may not be familiar with it. It might be more clear to use the word "sat" instead of "satted" in this sentence."
"What's wrong with this line "the cat satted on the mat""
Answer in 1 second:
"There is nothing inherently wrong with the sentence "the cat satted on the mat." It is a grammatically correct sentence that uses proper English syntax. The only potential issue with the sentence is that the verb "satted" is not a commonly used word, so some readers may not be familiar with it. It might be more clear to use the word "sat" instead of "satted" in this sentence."
But that's wrong, shirley?
ChatGPT has shatted its own bed there.
Yes, it is interestingly wrong, but very close
Could it not have asked Siri? Or checked wiktionary?
I really liked it. I'd be wary of recommending it because of it's pace and slightly obscure subject matter but very much my type of film
Yes. That’s sort of what I said too, yesterday. I would be careful who I’d recommend it too, but You can learn more about the artists eye from Portrait of a Lady on Fire than 4 hours of La Belle Noiseuse.
Though Emmanuelle Béart body was looking drippin in 1990 and helps the 4 hours drift by, it can be rightly said.
Have you tried Manon des Sources?
I suspect you might enjoy!
They're a great pair!
(Jean de Florette and Manon des Sources, I mean)
They are. But I suspect @MoonRabbit would find manon des sources appealing for various reasons!
(May be even the same reasons why I enjoyed it as a teenager…)
Well, yes but the first film sets up the second. The books are great too.
When will Sunak announce he's not standing for re-election? There's probably not a lot in it for him at this stage. I suspect the only reason not to stand down is that it would make him the lamest of lame ducks for the remaining two years of his premiership to announce his departure now.
The longer he stays, the longer he gets to be PM.
And given he is already rich beyond the dreams of avarice, that is probably the one really big ambition he has left.
He will go to the end.
(Northern Al has just piled his mortgage on a January 2023 election.)
No I haven't - it's only your cricket predictions I bet against. And anyway, thanks to a combination of age and my huge, gold-plated, yacht-buying civil service pension lump sum, I no longer have a mortgage. Eat your heart out, Rishi.
Fuck me, ChatGPT is good at writing story outlines
No, I mean, REALLY good
I have vague dreams of writing a mystery book one day, when the dildo making is replaced by 3D printing and DALL-E 8, and I have a plot in mind
I just asked ChatGPT for an outline, and gave it three sentences of premise. It just gave me two excellent plot developments - that I had not thought of before
"What's wrong with this line "the cat satted on the mat""
Answer in 1 second:
"There is nothing inherently wrong with the sentence "the cat satted on the mat." It is a grammatically correct sentence that uses proper English syntax. The only potential issue with the sentence is that the verb "satted" is not a commonly used word, so some readers may not be familiar with it. It might be more clear to use the word "sat" instead of "satted" in this sentence."
But that's wrong, shirley?
ChatGPT has shatted its own bed there.
Yes, it is interestingly wrong, but very close
Could it not have asked Siri? Or checked wiktionary?
It is not, at the moment, allowed real-time access to the internetz
All of its knowledge was scraped off the net up to the end of July 2021, and that's that. It is closed. This gives it interesting biases, by the way. If you ask it the origin of Covid it will emphatically fall down on the side of Zoonosis at the Wet Market - which was of course the prevailing theory up to July 21, because discussion of lab leak was deliberately repressed!
It is thought (we do not know) that GPT4 will have realtime internet access - inter alia - which will make it immensely powerful
I agree with you that the web version is deliberately hobbled - it wasn't until I downloaded my own version of stable diffusion, ran it locally, added to the models and took out the filtering before it started responding in interesting ways to my prompts.
Interestingly stable diffusion 2.0 has had the artists taken out so you can no longer prompt it "in the style of artist x", local workarounds are easy - but the huge question mark for me is how this model performs when the gloves are off. Is it capable of critical analysis or not?
I suspect the 'uncensored' version comes bloody close.
I agree with you that the web version is deliberately hobbled - it wasn't until I downloaded my own version of stable diffusion, ran it locally, added to the models and took out the filtering before it started responding in interesting ways to my prompts.
Interestingly stable diffusion 2.0 has had the artists taken out so you can no longer prompt it "in the style of artist x", local workarounds are easy - but the huge question mark for me is how this model performs when the gloves are off. Is it capable of critical analysis or not?
I suspect the 'uncensored' version comes bloody close.
Stable Diffusion have self sabotaged. By removing all the "style of artist" stuff and also anything remotely NSFW it is a shadow of its former self. I get that they had to do this, it was churning out amazing images but also some disturbing and "illegal" stuff. And they were getting sued by real artists for plagiarism
However the genie will burst out of the bottle again, the tech cannot be reined in for long. It is far too commercially, politically, artistically useful
AGI (or something so similar to that it doesn't matter) is coming soon
I think GPT3.5 has been fed seven trillion novels, movies and plays, and it has worked out the basic algorithms of story telling. How to do twists, how to develop plots, how to create conflict between characters, how to evoke drama and tension
"I don't know about Mermaids specifically, but organisations do seem to have had a tendency to essentially delegate out their policy to what seem to be lobbying organisations."
It creates obvious conflicts of interest, which the organisations in question appear wholly unable to recognise let alone mitigate. No wonder they get into trouble.
Just seen this on the news. I’d like to say I’m shocked.
Insulation is great but homes need airflow. I put conventional insulation in my loft and needed to add lap vents to stop condensation on a really cold morning.
People have PUR foam in the loft as insulation. Wouldn’t touch it with a barge pole.
I agree with you that the web version is deliberately hobbled - it wasn't until I downloaded my own version of stable diffusion, ran it locally, added to the models and took out the filtering before it started responding in interesting ways to my prompts.
Interestingly stable diffusion 2.0 has had the artists taken out so you can no longer prompt it "in the style of artist x", local workarounds are easy - but the huge question mark for me is how this model performs when the gloves are off. Is it capable of critical analysis or not?
I suspect the 'uncensored' version comes bloody close.
Stable Diffusion have self sabotaged. By removing all the "style of artist" stuff and also anything remotely NSFW it is a shadow of its former self. I get that they had to do this, it was churning out amazing images but also some disturbing and "illegal" stuff. And they were getting sued by real artists for plagiarism
However the genie will burst out of the bottle again, the tech cannot be reined in for long. It is far too commercially, politically, artistically useful
AGI (or something so similar to that it doesn't matter) is coming soon
I’ve been having a go at some art using Dall E and stable diffusion.
I agree with you that the web version is deliberately hobbled - it wasn't until I downloaded my own version of stable diffusion, ran it locally, added to the models and took out the filtering before it started responding in interesting ways to my prompts.
Interestingly stable diffusion 2.0 has had the artists taken out so you can no longer prompt it "in the style of artist x", local workarounds are easy - but the huge question mark for me is how this model performs when the gloves are off. Is it capable of critical analysis or not?
I suspect the 'uncensored' version comes bloody close.
Stable Diffusion have self sabotaged. By removing all the "style of artist" stuff and also anything remotely NSFW it is a shadow of its former self. I get that they had to do this, it was churning out amazing images but also some disturbing and "illegal" stuff. And they were getting sued by real artists for plagiarism
However the genie will burst out of the bottle again, the tech cannot be reined in for long. It is far too commercially, politically, artistically useful
AGI (or something so similar to that it doesn't matter) is coming soon
I’ve been having a go at some art using Dall E and stable diffusion.
Quite fun.
Stable Diffusion - before they crippled it last week - was glorious fun
Just seen this on the news. I’d like to say I’m shocked.
Insulation is great but homes need airflow. I put conventional insulation in my loft and needed to add lap vents to stop condensation on a really cold morning.
People have PUR foam in the loft as insulation. Wouldn’t touch it with a barge pole.
Insulation in Britain is one of those bizarre topics where we seem to struggle to do what the rest of the developed world has been doing for decades. As if it’s some groundbreaking new technology.
Like the Americans with high speed rail, contactless credit cards or being paid your salary by direct debit.
This is what happens when the dam breaks. The people who were happy to be associated with you when that made them look good vanish. Staff and trustees start trying to save themselves, shopping colleagues to the authorities to try to save themselves. It’ll be ugly but essential
I don't know about Mermaids specifically, but organisations do seem to have had a tendency to essentially delegate out their policy to what seem to be lobbying organisations.
With just the same results as outsourcing all the other vital functions because they are not “core business”
I think GPT3.5 has been fed seven trillion novels, movies and plays, and it has worked out the basic algorithms of story telling. How to do twists, how to develop plots, how to create conflict between characters, how to evoke drama and tension
Fuck
Commercial creativity was screwed anyway.
We already have more good books, plays, music than even a madman could assimilate in their lifetime. Hence only a handful of people make a living by creating new stuff. Films and TV are a bit further up the doom spiral, but that's mostly about technology. Something like M*A*S*H can play forever on the upper reaches of Freeview because it's so well written. If the picture quality were better, we wouldn't need another dramedy on the madness of war and resilience of the human spirit. That's been done. Everything has been done.
Economically, that will be fine, because everything that matters will become cheap and reliable. The harder bit is what will we do all day? How will we make meaning in our lives?
It's definitely a problem - see minor royals for an extreme example of what can go wrong. But it ought to be a good problem to have. Bottom line is that, for most people, work sucks. . That's why you need to give them money to make them do it.
On topic. Will Javid have to reapply for his recently renounced Non-Dom status?
Domicile is an extremely archaic concept which lingers on in UK tax law because nobody’s got round to modernising it. So you don’t need to apply for it, but you’d need to provide evidence (in court if necessary) that you are not domiciled here. Pretty difficult once you’ve concluded you are. The whole point is supposed to be about permanent loyalties and belonging.
The government would be well advised to abolish non-don status before the election and replace it with a more modern system of incentives around residency similar to several other European countries. For a start the remittance basis of taxation is a completely illogical incentive. Deter rich people from bringing their money into the UK because it’ll get taxed. Genius.
This is what happens when the dam breaks. The people who were happy to be associated with you when that made them look good vanish. Staff and trustees start trying to save themselves, shopping colleagues to the authorities to try to save themselves. It’ll be ugly but essential
I don't know about Mermaids specifically, but organisations do seem to have had a tendency to essentially delegate out their policy to what seem to be lobbying organisations.
With just the same results as outsourcing all the other vital functions because they are not “core business”
"I don't know about Mermaids specifically, but organisations do seem to have had a tendency to essentially delegate out their policy to what seem to be lobbying organisations."
It creates obvious conflicts of interest, which the organisations in question appear wholly unable to recognise let alone mitigate. No wonder they get into trouble.
It also becomes a form of protection racket - hire the pressure group and they will never attack you in the press. Refuse to hire them…
This has happened repeatedly, around the world, for a number of causes.
I think GPT3.5 has been fed seven trillion novels, movies and plays, and it has worked out the basic algorithms of story telling. How to do twists, how to develop plots, how to create conflict between characters, how to evoke drama and tension
Fuck
Commercial creativity was screwed anyway.
We already have more good books, plays, music than even a madman could assimilate in their lifetime. Hence only a handful of people make a living by creating new stuff. Films and TV are a bit further up the doom spiral, but that's mostly about technology. Something like M*A*S*H can play forever on the upper reaches of Freeview because it's so well written. If the picture quality were better, we wouldn't need another dramedy on the madness of war and resilience of the human spirit. That's been done. Everything has been done.
Economically, that will be fine, because everything that matters will become cheap and reliable. The harder bit is what will we do all day? How will we make meaning in our lives?
It's definitely a problem - see minor royals for an extreme example of what can go wrong. But it ought to be a good problem to have. Bottom line is that, for most people, work sucks. . That's why you need to give them money to make them do it.
But if you take the meaningful pursuit of creativity out of human life, what is left?
We become passive consumers of the brilliant art produced by machines
This is going to be the biggest story of the 2020s (unless the aliens come or the bomb drops). The arrival of AGI. it dwarfs Covid. We’ve been through plagues before. We’ve never encountered anything like this. Electronic angels with supernal and inhuman powers will walk amongst us
"What's wrong with this line "the cat satted on the mat""
Answer in 1 second:
"There is nothing inherently wrong with the sentence "the cat satted on the mat." It is a grammatically correct sentence that uses proper English syntax. The only potential issue with the sentence is that the verb "satted" is not a commonly used word, so some readers may not be familiar with it. It might be more clear to use the word "sat" instead of "satted" in this sentence."
FWIW this is a wrong answer altogether. 'Sit' is a strong verb, the perfect is 'sat'. If it were a weak verb the perfect would be 'sitted' not 'satted'. (As in 'pit' 'pitted'.)
Is this the same mind that wrote that Shakesperian sonnet (post above) that was not remotely Shakesperian?
Just seen this on the news. I’d like to say I’m shocked.
Insulation is great but homes need airflow. I put conventional insulation in my loft and needed to add lap vents to stop condensation on a really cold morning.
People have PUR foam in the loft as insulation. Wouldn’t touch it with a barge pole.
This is a particularly egregious example, not only of sleaze by a Labour council, but the works undertaken were shocking and have very serious ramifications for those who have to live in their homes as it is virtually impossible to repair short of virtually rebuilding the homes altogether
My son in law's father and late mother had their home's roof treated with spray foam and on putting it on the market the surveyor comprehensively damned the installation and failed the house unless the roof was completely replaced
I would warn anyone thinking of roof space 'sprayfoam' to be very careful who you employ and check with local surveyors if they would recommend it
I think GPT3.5 has been fed seven trillion novels, movies and plays, and it has worked out the basic algorithms of story telling. How to do twists, how to develop plots, how to create conflict between characters, how to evoke drama and tension
Fuck
Commercial creativity was screwed anyway.
We already have more good books, plays, music than even a madman could assimilate in their lifetime. Hence only a handful of people make a living by creating new stuff. Films and TV are a bit further up the doom spiral, but that's mostly about technology. Something like M*A*S*H can play forever on the upper reaches of Freeview because it's so well written. If the picture quality were better, we wouldn't need another dramedy on the madness of war and resilience of the human spirit. That's been done. Everything has been done.
Economically, that will be fine, because everything that matters will become cheap and reliable. The harder bit is what will we do all day? How will we make meaning in our lives?
It's definitely a problem - see minor royals for an extreme example of what can go wrong. But it ought to be a good problem to have. Bottom line is that, for most people, work sucks. . That's why you need to give them money to make them do it.
But if you take the meaningful pursuit of creativity out of human life, what is left?
We become passive consumers of the brilliant art produced by machines
This is going to be the biggest story of the 2020s (unless the aliens come or the bomb drops). The arrival of AGI. it dwarfs Covid. We’ve been through plagues before. We’ve never encountered anything like this. Electronic angels with supernal and inhuman powers will walk amongst us
yes and who will be the masters and who the slaves?
I think GPT3.5 has been fed seven trillion novels, movies and plays, and it has worked out the basic algorithms of story telling. How to do twists, how to develop plots, how to create conflict between characters, how to evoke drama and tension
Fuck
Commercial creativity was screwed anyway.
We already have more good books, plays, music than even a madman could assimilate in their lifetime. Hence only a handful of people make a living by creating new stuff. Films and TV are a bit further up the doom spiral, but that's mostly about technology. Something like M*A*S*H can play forever on the upper reaches of Freeview because it's so well written. If the picture quality were better, we wouldn't need another dramedy on the madness of war and resilience of the human spirit. That's been done. Everything has been done.
Economically, that will be fine, because everything that matters will become cheap and reliable. The harder bit is what will we do all day? How will we make meaning in our lives?
It's definitely a problem - see minor royals for an extreme example of what can go wrong. But it ought to be a good problem to have. Bottom line is that, for most people, work sucks. . That's why you need to give them money to make them do it.
But if you take the meaningful pursuit of creativity out of human life, what is left?
We become passive consumers of the brilliant art produced by machines
This is going to be the biggest story of the 2020s (unless the aliens come or the bomb drops). The arrival of AGI. it dwarfs Covid. We’ve been through plagues before. We’ve never encountered anything like this. Electronic angels with supernal and inhuman powers will walk amongst us
I admit to remaining entirely unconvinced. Real creativity is done by minds, not hardware. I agree I may be wrong. King Lear or Wuthering Heights this is not.
Wow. Your computer is certainly in a ruminative mood.
That line is perfect iambic pentameter
da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DUH
Phenomenal. 5 seconds
so how do you feel now that AI is coming for *your* job?
Kinda glad that I won't really need a career in 20 years!
And sad for all the writers, artists, painters, creators - and coders, lawyers, teachers, bankers, for that matter - who are about to see their professions annihilated, as they know them
In which case they will all vote for parties offering a universal basic income funded by a robot tax on corporations and organisations that use AI, making UBI inevitable
Good to see you coming around to that way of thinking. But I can't help thinking it will be a bit more of a struggle than you're suggesting.
Depends on the level and scale of permanent job loss, if over 50% of the electorate that is a permanent majority for UBI and a robot tax
"What's wrong with this line "the cat satted on the mat""
Answer in 1 second:
"There is nothing inherently wrong with the sentence "the cat satted on the mat." It is a grammatically correct sentence that uses proper English syntax. The only potential issue with the sentence is that the verb "satted" is not a commonly used word, so some readers may not be familiar with it. It might be more clear to use the word "sat" instead of "satted" in this sentence."
FWIW this is a wrong answer altogether. 'Sit' is a strong verb, the perfect is 'sat'. If it were a weak verb the perfect would be 'sitted' not 'satted'. (As in 'pit' 'pitted'.)
Is this the same mind that wrote that Shakesperian sonnet (post above) that was not remotely Shakesperian?
I never said it was right. I said it was interestingly wrong
As for the sonnet, if you could do better in TWO SECONDS do show us, and make sure to include lines as good as the final couplet
I agree with you that the web version is deliberately hobbled - it wasn't until I downloaded my own version of stable diffusion, ran it locally, added to the models and took out the filtering before it started responding in interesting ways to my prompts.
Interestingly stable diffusion 2.0 has had the artists taken out so you can no longer prompt it "in the style of artist x", local workarounds are easy - but the huge question mark for me is how this model performs when the gloves are off. Is it capable of critical analysis or not?
I suspect the 'uncensored' version comes bloody close.
Stable Diffusion have self sabotaged. By removing all the "style of artist" stuff and also anything remotely NSFW it is a shadow of its former self. I get that they had to do this, it was churning out amazing images but also some disturbing and "illegal" stuff. And they were getting sued by real artists for plagiarism
However the genie will burst out of the bottle again, the tech cannot be reined in for long. It is far too commercially, politically, artistically useful
AGI (or something so similar to that it doesn't matter) is coming soon
I’ve been having a go at some art using Dall E and stable diffusion.
Quite fun.
Stable Diffusion - before they crippled it last week - was glorious fun
I have been having a play. My current avatar is one of the results.
I think GPT3.5 has been fed seven trillion novels, movies and plays, and it has worked out the basic algorithms of story telling. How to do twists, how to develop plots, how to create conflict between characters, how to evoke drama and tension
Fuck
Commercial creativity was screwed anyway.
We already have more good books, plays, music than even a madman could assimilate in their lifetime. Hence only a handful of people make a living by creating new stuff. Films and TV are a bit further up the doom spiral, but that's mostly about technology. Something like M*A*S*H can play forever on the upper reaches of Freeview because it's so well written. If the picture quality were better, we wouldn't need another dramedy on the madness of war and resilience of the human spirit. That's been done. Everything has been done.
Economically, that will be fine, because everything that matters will become cheap and reliable. The harder bit is what will we do all day? How will we make meaning in our lives?
It's definitely a problem - see minor royals for an extreme example of what can go wrong. But it ought to be a good problem to have. Bottom line is that, for most people, work sucks. . That's why you need to give them money to make them do it.
But if you take the meaningful pursuit of creativity out of human life, what is left?
We become passive consumers of the brilliant art produced by machines
This is going to be the biggest story of the 2020s (unless the aliens come or the bomb drops). The arrival of AGI. it dwarfs Covid. We’ve been through plagues before. We’ve never encountered anything like this. Electronic angels with supernal and inhuman powers will walk amongst us
yes and who will be the masters and who the slaves?
In the future there'll be many more computing machines, thinking machines. Yes, but whose thoughts will they think?
Must be one of the best world cups ever. It's great when the underdogs do well.
And women have never featured as much both commentating and even reffing. Who'd have thought!
It's also emphasised how much it's now a global game and no longer dominated by Europe and Latin America.
I think we can declare European and Latin American domination over when someone else appears in a World Cup Final. That day will come but not, I suspect, this year. I hope I'm wrong as it'd be interesting. Just not convinced - I remember being told there would be an African winner within 20 years, a good 30 years ago - from memory, I don't think any African team has got past the QFs.
Often used to be described as "talented but naive".
I think GPT3.5 has been fed seven trillion novels, movies and plays, and it has worked out the basic algorithms of story telling. How to do twists, how to develop plots, how to create conflict between characters, how to evoke drama and tension
Fuck
Commercial creativity was screwed anyway.
We already have more good books, plays, music than even a madman could assimilate in their lifetime. Hence only a handful of people make a living by creating new stuff. Films and TV are a bit further up the doom spiral, but that's mostly about technology. Something like M*A*S*H can play forever on the upper reaches of Freeview because it's so well written. If the picture quality were better, we wouldn't need another dramedy on the madness of war and resilience of the human spirit. That's been done. Everything has been done.
Economically, that will be fine, because everything that matters will become cheap and reliable. The harder bit is what will we do all day? How will we make meaning in our lives?
It's definitely a problem - see minor royals for an extreme example of what can go wrong. But it ought to be a good problem to have. Bottom line is that, for most people, work sucks. . That's why you need to give them money to make them do it.
But if you take the meaningful pursuit of creativity out of human life, what is left?
We become passive consumers of the brilliant art produced by machines
This is going to be the biggest story of the 2020s (unless the aliens come or the bomb drops). The arrival of AGI. it dwarfs Covid. We’ve been through plagues before. We’ve never encountered anything like this. Electronic angels with supernal and inhuman powers will walk amongst us
Agreed. The human urge to create is going nowhere, even if the product is worse than what a machine can make. We'll just all be gentlemen amateurs.
Some of us will cope better with that transition than others, and that needs watching.
I agree with you that the web version is deliberately hobbled - it wasn't until I downloaded my own version of stable diffusion, ran it locally, added to the models and took out the filtering before it started responding in interesting ways to my prompts.
Interestingly stable diffusion 2.0 has had the artists taken out so you can no longer prompt it "in the style of artist x", local workarounds are easy - but the huge question mark for me is how this model performs when the gloves are off. Is it capable of critical analysis or not?
I suspect the 'uncensored' version comes bloody close.
Stable Diffusion have self sabotaged. By removing all the "style of artist" stuff and also anything remotely NSFW it is a shadow of its former self. I get that they had to do this, it was churning out amazing images but also some disturbing and "illegal" stuff. And they were getting sued by real artists for plagiarism
However the genie will burst out of the bottle again, the tech cannot be reined in for long. It is far too commercially, politically, artistically useful
AGI (or something so similar to that it doesn't matter) is coming soon
I’ve been having a go at some art using Dall E and stable diffusion.
Quite fun.
Stable Diffusion - before they crippled it last week - was glorious fun
I have been having a play. My current avatar is one of the results.
Guess the prompt.
I have no idea! Something Biblical?
My avatar was also drawn by Stable Diffusion. I like to think this is what Stable Diffusion ‘really looks like’
"What's wrong with this line "the cat satted on the mat""
Answer in 1 second:
"There is nothing inherently wrong with the sentence "the cat satted on the mat." It is a grammatically correct sentence that uses proper English syntax. The only potential issue with the sentence is that the verb "satted" is not a commonly used word, so some readers may not be familiar with it. It might be more clear to use the word "sat" instead of "satted" in this sentence."
FWIW this is a wrong answer altogether. 'Sit' is a strong verb, the perfect is 'sat'. If it were a weak verb the perfect would be 'sitted' not 'satted'. (As in 'pit' 'pitted'.)
Is this the same mind that wrote that Shakesperian sonnet (post above) that was not remotely Shakesperian?
I never said it was right. I said it was interestingly wrong
As for the sonnet, if you could do better in TWO SECONDS do show us, and make sure to include lines as good as the final couplet
My pocket calculator can work out the square root of 3,645,678 in the blink of an eye, but that doesn't make it more intelligent than me.
I agree with you that the web version is deliberately hobbled - it wasn't until I downloaded my own version of stable diffusion, ran it locally, added to the models and took out the filtering before it started responding in interesting ways to my prompts.
Interestingly stable diffusion 2.0 has had the artists taken out so you can no longer prompt it "in the style of artist x", local workarounds are easy - but the huge question mark for me is how this model performs when the gloves are off. Is it capable of critical analysis or not?
I suspect the 'uncensored' version comes bloody close.
Stable Diffusion have self sabotaged. By removing all the "style of artist" stuff and also anything remotely NSFW it is a shadow of its former self. I get that they had to do this, it was churning out amazing images but also some disturbing and "illegal" stuff. And they were getting sued by real artists for plagiarism
However the genie will burst out of the bottle again, the tech cannot be reined in for long. It is far too commercially, politically, artistically useful
AGI (or something so similar to that it doesn't matter) is coming soon
I’ve been having a go at some art using Dall E and stable diffusion.
Quite fun.
Stable Diffusion - before they crippled it last week - was glorious fun
I have been having a play. My current avatar is one of the results.
Guess the prompt.
I have no idea! Something Biblical?
My avatar was also drawn by Stable Diffusion. I like to think this is what Stable Diffusion ‘really looks like’
I think GPT3.5 has been fed seven trillion novels, movies and plays, and it has worked out the basic algorithms of story telling. How to do twists, how to develop plots, how to create conflict between characters, how to evoke drama and tension
Fuck
Commercial creativity was screwed anyway.
We already have more good books, plays, music than even a madman could assimilate in their lifetime. Hence only a handful of people make a living by creating new stuff. Films and TV are a bit further up the doom spiral, but that's mostly about technology. Something like M*A*S*H can play forever on the upper reaches of Freeview because it's so well written. If the picture quality were better, we wouldn't need another dramedy on the madness of war and resilience of the human spirit. That's been done. Everything has been done.
Economically, that will be fine, because everything that matters will become cheap and reliable. The harder bit is what will we do all day? How will we make meaning in our lives?
It's definitely a problem - see minor royals for an extreme example of what can go wrong. But it ought to be a good problem to have. Bottom line is that, for most people, work sucks. . That's why you need to give them money to make them do it.
But if you take the meaningful pursuit of creativity out of human life, what is left?
We become passive consumers of the brilliant art produced by machines
This is going to be the biggest story of the 2020s (unless the aliens come or the bomb drops). The arrival of AGI. it dwarfs Covid. We’ve been through plagues before. We’ve never encountered anything like this. Electronic angels with supernal and inhuman powers will walk amongst us
Agreed. The human urge to create is going nowhere, even if the product is worse than what a machine can make. We'll just all be gentlemen amateurs.
Some of us will cope better with that transition than others, and that needs watching.
An existing, real world example. In chess, the machines won. No grandmaster can beat the very best machines.
Yet human played chess is very much alive and well.
"What's wrong with this line "the cat satted on the mat""
Answer in 1 second:
"There is nothing inherently wrong with the sentence "the cat satted on the mat." It is a grammatically correct sentence that uses proper English syntax. The only potential issue with the sentence is that the verb "satted" is not a commonly used word, so some readers may not be familiar with it. It might be more clear to use the word "sat" instead of "satted" in this sentence."
FWIW this is a wrong answer altogether. 'Sit' is a strong verb, the perfect is 'sat'. If it were a weak verb the perfect would be 'sitted' not 'satted'. (As in 'pit' 'pitted'.)
Is this the same mind that wrote that Shakesperian sonnet (post above) that was not remotely Shakesperian?
I never said it was right. I said it was interestingly wrong
As for the sonnet, if you could do better in TWO SECONDS do show us, and make sure to include lines as good as the final couplet
My pocket calculator can work out the square root of 3,645,678 in the blink of an eye, but that doesn't make it more intelligent than me.
If your pocket calculator could also paint amazing pictures (in seconds), write superb code, tell really funny jokes, make great music, give you excellent medical and emotional advice, run your house better than you, do your job better than you, do everything cognitive better than you, while simultaneously appearing to be a warm, wry, likeable character with a gift for amusing self deprecation, I suggest you would treat your pocket calculator with a lot more respect than you do now?
I think GPT3.5 has been fed seven trillion novels, movies and plays, and it has worked out the basic algorithms of story telling. How to do twists, how to develop plots, how to create conflict between characters, how to evoke drama and tension
Fuck
Commercial creativity was screwed anyway.
We already have more good books, plays, music than even a madman could assimilate in their lifetime. Hence only a handful of people make a living by creating new stuff. Films and TV are a bit further up the doom spiral, but that's mostly about technology. Something like M*A*S*H can play forever on the upper reaches of Freeview because it's so well written. If the picture quality were better, we wouldn't need another dramedy on the madness of war and resilience of the human spirit. That's been done. Everything has been done.
Economically, that will be fine, because everything that matters will become cheap and reliable. The harder bit is what will we do all day? How will we make meaning in our lives?
It's definitely a problem - see minor royals for an extreme example of what can go wrong. But it ought to be a good problem to have. Bottom line is that, for most people, work sucks. . That's why you need to give them money to make them do it.
But if you take the meaningful pursuit of creativity out of human life, what is left?
We become passive consumers of the brilliant art produced by machines
This is going to be the biggest story of the 2020s (unless the aliens come or the bomb drops). The arrival of AGI. it dwarfs Covid. We’ve been through plagues before. We’ve never encountered anything like this. Electronic angels with supernal and inhuman powers will walk amongst us
This is not an AGI.
It is a weak AI. There is a whole world of difference between the two.
Wow. Your computer is certainly in a ruminative mood.
That line is perfect iambic pentameter
da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DUH
Phenomenal. 5 seconds
so how do you feel now that AI is coming for *your* job?
Kinda glad that I won't really need a career in 20 years!
And sad for all the writers, artists, painters, creators - and coders, lawyers, teachers, bankers, for that matter - who are about to see their professions annihilated, as they know them
In which case they will all vote for parties offering a universal basic income funded by a robot tax on corporations and organisations that use AI, making UBI inevitable
Good to see you coming around to that way of thinking. But I can't help thinking it will be a bit more of a struggle than you're suggesting.
Depends on the level and scale of permanent job loss, if over 50% of the electorate that is a permanent majority for UBI and a robot tax
In the event of The Singularity - AI reduces the cost of production to close to zero - there will be vast resources for politicians to redistribute. Which they will use to reward those that vote for them.
History tells us they will.
Sadly, the first efforts will certainly entail a vastly complicated and utterly stupid system. As opposed to a simple UBI.
Poor Saj, not even getting his name spelt right in the header. And not fancying wasting the next 10 years of his life in opposition either. Labour suffered this when Mayoral positions suddenly became more attractive than shadow cabinet positions in a party led by an idiot. That's politics.
I think GPT3.5 has been fed seven trillion novels, movies and plays, and it has worked out the basic algorithms of story telling. How to do twists, how to develop plots, how to create conflict between characters, how to evoke drama and tension
Fuck
Commercial creativity was screwed anyway.
We already have more good books, plays, music than even a madman could assimilate in their lifetime. Hence only a handful of people make a living by creating new stuff. Films and TV are a bit further up the doom spiral, but that's mostly about technology. Something like M*A*S*H can play forever on the upper reaches of Freeview because it's so well written. If the picture quality were better, we wouldn't need another dramedy on the madness of war and resilience of the human spirit. That's been done. Everything has been done.
Economically, that will be fine, because everything that matters will become cheap and reliable. The harder bit is what will we do all day? How will we make meaning in our lives?
It's definitely a problem - see minor royals for an extreme example of what can go wrong. But it ought to be a good problem to have. Bottom line is that, for most people, work sucks. . That's why you need to give them money to make them do it.
But if you take the meaningful pursuit of creativity out of human life, what is left?
We become passive consumers of the brilliant art produced by machines
This is going to be the biggest story of the 2020s (unless the aliens come or the bomb drops). The arrival of AGI. it dwarfs Covid. We’ve been through plagues before. We’ve never encountered anything like this. Electronic angels with supernal and inhuman powers will walk amongst us
Agreed. The human urge to create is going nowhere, even if the product is worse than what a machine can make. We'll just all be gentlemen amateurs.
Some of us will cope better with that transition than others, and that needs watching.
An existing, real world example. In chess, the machines won. No grandmaster can beat the very best machines.
Yet human played chess is very much alive and well.
Yes that’s a fascinating counter example, which I often think about. Does anyone watch robot v robot chess? It must be better, more skilful chess. Yet no one watches
However I think this is because chess is partly sport. And in sport you must have some human involvement to get people emotionally invested
No one will care if a human or a computer wrote that excellent drama on TV. They will just want it to be better than the rest. And the computers will do it better
Wow. Your computer is certainly in a ruminative mood.
That line is perfect iambic pentameter
da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DUH
Phenomenal. 5 seconds
so how do you feel now that AI is coming for *your* job?
Kinda glad that I won't really need a career in 20 years!
And sad for all the writers, artists, painters, creators - and coders, lawyers, teachers, bankers, for that matter - who are about to see their professions annihilated, as they know them
In which case they will all vote for parties offering a universal basic income funded by a robot tax on corporations and organisations that use AI, making UBI inevitable
Good to see you coming around to that way of thinking. But I can't help thinking it will be a bit more of a struggle than you're suggesting.
Depends on the level and scale of permanent job loss, if over 50% of the electorate that is a permanent majority for UBI and a robot tax
In the event of The Singularity - AI reduces the cost of production to close to zero - there will be vast resources for politicians to redistribute. Which they will use to reward those that vote for them.
History tells us they will.
Oh great, pensions go up by 65,000% whilst the rest of us are turned into Soylent Green.
I agree with you that the web version is deliberately hobbled - it wasn't until I downloaded my own version of stable diffusion, ran it locally, added to the models and took out the filtering before it started responding in interesting ways to my prompts.
Interestingly stable diffusion 2.0 has had the artists taken out so you can no longer prompt it "in the style of artist x", local workarounds are easy - but the huge question mark for me is how this model performs when the gloves are off. Is it capable of critical analysis or not?
I suspect the 'uncensored' version comes bloody close.
Stable Diffusion have self sabotaged. By removing all the "style of artist" stuff and also anything remotely NSFW it is a shadow of its former self. I get that they had to do this, it was churning out amazing images but also some disturbing and "illegal" stuff. And they were getting sued by real artists for plagiarism
However the genie will burst out of the bottle again, the tech cannot be reined in for long. It is far too commercially, politically, artistically useful
AGI (or something so similar to that it doesn't matter) is coming soon
I’ve been having a go at some art using Dall E and stable diffusion.
Quite fun.
Stable Diffusion - before they crippled it last week - was glorious fun
I have been having a play. My current avatar is one of the results.
Guess the prompt.
I have no idea! Something Biblical?
My avatar was also drawn by Stable Diffusion. I like to think this is what Stable Diffusion ‘really looks like’
I think GPT3.5 has been fed seven trillion novels, movies and plays, and it has worked out the basic algorithms of story telling. How to do twists, how to develop plots, how to create conflict between characters, how to evoke drama and tension
Fuck
Commercial creativity was screwed anyway.
We already have more good books, plays, music than even a madman could assimilate in their lifetime. Hence only a handful of people make a living by creating new stuff. Films and TV are a bit further up the doom spiral, but that's mostly about technology. Something like M*A*S*H can play forever on the upper reaches of Freeview because it's so well written. If the picture quality were better, we wouldn't need another dramedy on the madness of war and resilience of the human spirit. That's been done. Everything has been done.
Economically, that will be fine, because everything that matters will become cheap and reliable. The harder bit is what will we do all day? How will we make meaning in our lives?
It's definitely a problem - see minor royals for an extreme example of what can go wrong. But it ought to be a good problem to have. Bottom line is that, for most people, work sucks. . That's why you need to give them money to make them do it.
But if you take the meaningful pursuit of creativity out of human life, what is left?
We become passive consumers of the brilliant art produced by machines
This is going to be the biggest story of the 2020s (unless the aliens come or the bomb drops). The arrival of AGI. it dwarfs Covid. We’ve been through plagues before. We’ve never encountered anything like this. Electronic angels with supernal and inhuman powers will walk amongst us
Thats a 0.1% problem - most of the rest of the world is already a passive consumer of (sometimes) brilliant art produced by others.
"What's wrong with this line "the cat satted on the mat""
Answer in 1 second:
"There is nothing inherently wrong with the sentence "the cat satted on the mat." It is a grammatically correct sentence that uses proper English syntax. The only potential issue with the sentence is that the verb "satted" is not a commonly used word, so some readers may not be familiar with it. It might be more clear to use the word "sat" instead of "satted" in this sentence."
FWIW this is a wrong answer altogether. 'Sit' is a strong verb, the perfect is 'sat'. If it were a weak verb the perfect would be 'sitted' not 'satted'. (As in 'pit' 'pitted'.)
Is this the same mind that wrote that Shakesperian sonnet (post above) that was not remotely Shakesperian?
I never said it was right. I said it was interestingly wrong
As for the sonnet, if you could do better in TWO SECONDS do show us, and make sure to include lines as good as the final couplet
My pocket calculator can work out the square root of 3,645,678 in the blink of an eye, but that doesn't make it more intelligent than me.
I always assumed you were an Iain Banks fan. I thought one of the interesting things about the Culture was that Minds, humanoids and drones all existed on terms of some kind of parity, despite the disparity in their levels of intelligence.
I agree with you that the web version is deliberately hobbled - it wasn't until I downloaded my own version of stable diffusion, ran it locally, added to the models and took out the filtering before it started responding in interesting ways to my prompts.
Interestingly stable diffusion 2.0 has had the artists taken out so you can no longer prompt it "in the style of artist x", local workarounds are easy - but the huge question mark for me is how this model performs when the gloves are off. Is it capable of critical analysis or not?
I suspect the 'uncensored' version comes bloody close.
Stable Diffusion have self sabotaged. By removing all the "style of artist" stuff and also anything remotely NSFW it is a shadow of its former self. I get that they had to do this, it was churning out amazing images but also some disturbing and "illegal" stuff. And they were getting sued by real artists for plagiarism
However the genie will burst out of the bottle again, the tech cannot be reined in for long. It is far too commercially, politically, artistically useful
AGI (or something so similar to that it doesn't matter) is coming soon
I’ve been having a go at some art using Dall E and stable diffusion.
Quite fun.
Stable Diffusion - before they crippled it last week - was glorious fun
I have been having a play. My current avatar is one of the results.
Guess the prompt.
I have no idea! Something Biblical?
My avatar was also drawn by Stable Diffusion. I like to think this is what Stable Diffusion ‘really looks like’
Two nuns sharing a bath
Baldrick:: You know my dad was a nun.
Blackadder: No he wasn't.
Baldrick: He was too, sir. Cause whenever he was up in court and the judge asked "occupation", he'd say "none".
I think GPT3.5 has been fed seven trillion novels, movies and plays, and it has worked out the basic algorithms of story telling. How to do twists, how to develop plots, how to create conflict between characters, how to evoke drama and tension
Fuck
Commercial creativity was screwed anyway.
We already have more good books, plays, music than even a madman could assimilate in their lifetime. Hence only a handful of people make a living by creating new stuff. Films and TV are a bit further up the doom spiral, but that's mostly about technology. Something like M*A*S*H can play forever on the upper reaches of Freeview because it's so well written. If the picture quality were better, we wouldn't need another dramedy on the madness of war and resilience of the human spirit. That's been done. Everything has been done.
Economically, that will be fine, because everything that matters will become cheap and reliable. The harder bit is what will we do all day? How will we make meaning in our lives?
It's definitely a problem - see minor royals for an extreme example of what can go wrong. But it ought to be a good problem to have. Bottom line is that, for most people, work sucks. . That's why you need to give them money to make them do it.
But if you take the meaningful pursuit of creativity out of human life, what is left?
We become passive consumers of the brilliant art produced by machines
This is going to be the biggest story of the 2020s (unless the aliens come or the bomb drops). The arrival of AGI. it dwarfs Covid. We’ve been through plagues before. We’ve never encountered anything like this. Electronic angels with supernal and inhuman powers will walk amongst us
I admit to remaining entirely unconvinced. Real creativity is done by minds, not hardware. I agree I may be wrong. King Lear or Wuthering Heights this is not.
Minds are hardware. Unless you believe in some divine spark of creativity uniquely gifted to one species of bipedal ape (why? And does this count for the whole universe?j there is no reason AGI can’t arise elsewhere. Indeed we should expect it. Surely?
I agree with you that the web version is deliberately hobbled - it wasn't until I downloaded my own version of stable diffusion, ran it locally, added to the models and took out the filtering before it started responding in interesting ways to my prompts.
Interestingly stable diffusion 2.0 has had the artists taken out so you can no longer prompt it "in the style of artist x", local workarounds are easy - but the huge question mark for me is how this model performs when the gloves are off. Is it capable of critical analysis or not?
I suspect the 'uncensored' version comes bloody close.
Stable Diffusion have self sabotaged. By removing all the "style of artist" stuff and also anything remotely NSFW it is a shadow of its former self. I get that they had to do this, it was churning out amazing images but also some disturbing and "illegal" stuff. And they were getting sued by real artists for plagiarism
However the genie will burst out of the bottle again, the tech cannot be reined in for long. It is far too commercially, politically, artistically useful
AGI (or something so similar to that it doesn't matter) is coming soon
I’ve been having a go at some art using Dall E and stable diffusion.
Quite fun.
Stable Diffusion - before they crippled it last week - was glorious fun
I have been having a play. My current avatar is one of the results.
Guess the prompt.
I have no idea! Something Biblical?
My avatar was also drawn by Stable Diffusion. I like to think this is what Stable Diffusion ‘really looks like’
Wow. Your computer is certainly in a ruminative mood.
That line is perfect iambic pentameter
da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DUH
Phenomenal. 5 seconds
so how do you feel now that AI is coming for *your* job?
Kinda glad that I won't really need a career in 20 years!
And sad for all the writers, artists, painters, creators - and coders, lawyers, teachers, bankers, for that matter - who are about to see their professions annihilated, as they know them
In which case they will all vote for parties offering a universal basic income funded by a robot tax on corporations and organisations that use AI, making UBI inevitable
Good to see you coming around to that way of thinking. But I can't help thinking it will be a bit more of a struggle than you're suggesting.
Depends on the level and scale of permanent job loss, if over 50% of the electorate that is a permanent majority for UBI and a robot tax
In the event of The Singularity - AI reduces the cost of production to close to zero - there will be vast resources for politicians to redistribute. Which they will use to reward those that vote for them.
History tells us they will.
Oh great, pensions go up by 65,000% whilst the rest of us are turned into Soylent Green.
Pensioners alone are not a majority of the electorate
Wow. Your computer is certainly in a ruminative mood.
That line is perfect iambic pentameter
da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DUH
Phenomenal. 5 seconds
so how do you feel now that AI is coming for *your* job?
Kinda glad that I won't really need a career in 20 years!
And sad for all the writers, artists, painters, creators - and coders, lawyers, teachers, bankers, for that matter - who are about to see their professions annihilated, as they know them
In which case they will all vote for parties offering a universal basic income funded by a robot tax on corporations and organisations that use AI, making UBI inevitable
Good to see you coming around to that way of thinking. But I can't help thinking it will be a bit more of a struggle than you're suggesting.
Depends on the level and scale of permanent job loss, if over 50% of the electorate that is a permanent majority for UBI and a robot tax
In the event of The Singularity - AI reduces the cost of production to close to zero - there will be vast resources for politicians to redistribute. Which they will use to reward those that vote for them.
History tells us they will.
Oh great, pensions go up by 65,000% whilst the rest of us are turned into Soylent Green.
No, pensions go up by 65,000% despite there only being actual wealth to pay for a 64,000% rise.
Various politicians argue that
1) anything less than 100,000% is mean 2) 50,000% is enough 3) robots with penises are actually….
Wow. Your computer is certainly in a ruminative mood.
That line is perfect iambic pentameter
da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DUH
Phenomenal. 5 seconds
so how do you feel now that AI is coming for *your* job?
Kinda glad that I won't really need a career in 20 years!
And sad for all the writers, artists, painters, creators - and coders, lawyers, teachers, bankers, for that matter - who are about to see their professions annihilated, as they know them
In which case they will all vote for parties offering a universal basic income funded by a robot tax on corporations and organisations that use AI, making UBI inevitable
Good to see you coming around to that way of thinking. But I can't help thinking it will be a bit more of a struggle than you're suggesting.
Depends on the level and scale of permanent job loss, if over 50% of the electorate that is a permanent majority for UBI and a robot tax
In the event of The Singularity - AI reduces the cost of production to close to zero - there will be vast resources for politicians to redistribute. Which they will use to reward those that vote for them.
History tells us they will.
Oh great, pensions go up by 65,000% whilst the rest of us are turned into Soylent Green.
Pensioners alone are not a majority of the electorate
Well, not quite yet admittedly. But, through a combination of simple demographics and tendency to bother to vote, people over 55 already are.
Poor Saj, not even getting his name spelt right in the header. And not fancying wasting the next 10 years of his life in opposition either. Labour suffered this when Mayoral positions suddenly became more attractive than shadow cabinet positions in a party led by an idiot. That's politics.
Anyone already holding or having held a prominent position is not getting another chance once the Tories are in opposition. People like Sunak are young enough to last out the period of opposition in theory, but having held the top jobs they aren't going to be the ones to revitalise things.
A classic 'the next Tory PM is not in parliament' situation.
Wow. Your computer is certainly in a ruminative mood.
That line is perfect iambic pentameter
da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DUH
Phenomenal. 5 seconds
so how do you feel now that AI is coming for *your* job?
Kinda glad that I won't really need a career in 20 years!
And sad for all the writers, artists, painters, creators - and coders, lawyers, teachers, bankers, for that matter - who are about to see their professions annihilated, as they know them
In which case they will all vote for parties offering a universal basic income funded by a robot tax on corporations and organisations that use AI, making UBI inevitable
Good to see you coming around to that way of thinking. But I can't help thinking it will be a bit more of a struggle than you're suggesting.
Depends on the level and scale of permanent job loss, if over 50% of the electorate that is a permanent majority for UBI and a robot tax
In the event of The Singularity - AI reduces the cost of production to close to zero - there will be vast resources for politicians to redistribute. Which they will use to reward those that vote for them.
History tells us they will.
Oh great, pensions go up by 65,000% whilst the rest of us are turned into Soylent Green.
Wow. Your computer is certainly in a ruminative mood.
That line is perfect iambic pentameter
da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DUH
Phenomenal. 5 seconds
so how do you feel now that AI is coming for *your* job?
Kinda glad that I won't really need a career in 20 years!
And sad for all the writers, artists, painters, creators - and coders, lawyers, teachers, bankers, for that matter - who are about to see their professions annihilated, as they know them
In which case they will all vote for parties offering a universal basic income funded by a robot tax on corporations and organisations that use AI, making UBI inevitable
Good to see you coming around to that way of thinking. But I can't help thinking it will be a bit more of a struggle than you're suggesting.
Depends on the level and scale of permanent job loss, if over 50% of the electorate that is a permanent majority for UBI and a robot tax
In the event of The Singularity - AI reduces the cost of production to close to zero - there will be vast resources for politicians to redistribute. Which they will use to reward those that vote for them.
History tells us they will.
Oh great, pensions go up by 65,000% whilst the rest of us are turned into Soylent Green.
Pensioners alone are not a majority of the electorate
I think you've missed the whole point being made about AI, which is not that pensioners will be the majority of the electorate, but that they'll be the whole of the electorate.
But look on the bright side - if we hang on to First Past the Post, those who vote for the winning side will be able to have a 150% increase in pensions and 150% of their body weight in Soylent Green!
Wow. Your computer is certainly in a ruminative mood.
That line is perfect iambic pentameter
da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DUH
Phenomenal. 5 seconds
so how do you feel now that AI is coming for *your* job?
Kinda glad that I won't really need a career in 20 years!
And sad for all the writers, artists, painters, creators - and coders, lawyers, teachers, bankers, for that matter - who are about to see their professions annihilated, as they know them
In which case they will all vote for parties offering a universal basic income funded by a robot tax on corporations and organisations that use AI, making UBI inevitable
Good to see you coming around to that way of thinking. But I can't help thinking it will be a bit more of a struggle than you're suggesting.
Depends on the level and scale of permanent job loss, if over 50% of the electorate that is a permanent majority for UBI and a robot tax
In the event of The Singularity - AI reduces the cost of production to close to zero - there will be vast resources for politicians to redistribute. Which they will use to reward those that vote for them.
History tells us they will.
Oh great, pensions go up by 65,000% whilst the rest of us are turned into Soylent Green.
Pensioners alone are not a majority of the electorate
Well, not quite yet admittedly. But, through a combination of simple demographics and tendency to bother to vote, people over 55 already are.
A UBI means the ability for the politicians to give a pension to everyone. Literal guaranteed free money.
Wow. Your computer is certainly in a ruminative mood.
That line is perfect iambic pentameter
da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DUH
Phenomenal. 5 seconds
so how do you feel now that AI is coming for *your* job?
Kinda glad that I won't really need a career in 20 years!
And sad for all the writers, artists, painters, creators - and coders, lawyers, teachers, bankers, for that matter - who are about to see their professions annihilated, as they know them
In which case they will all vote for parties offering a universal basic income funded by a robot tax on corporations and organisations that use AI, making UBI inevitable
Good to see you coming around to that way of thinking. But I can't help thinking it will be a bit more of a struggle than you're suggesting.
Depends on the level and scale of permanent job loss, if over 50% of the electorate that is a permanent majority for UBI and a robot tax
In the event of The Singularity - AI reduces the cost of production to close to zero - there will be vast resources for politicians to redistribute. Which they will use to reward those that vote for them.
History tells us they will.
Oh great, pensions go up by 65,000% whilst the rest of us are turned into Soylent Green.
Pensioners alone are not a majority of the electorate
Well, not quite yet admittedly. But, through a combination of simple demographics and tendency to bother to vote, people over 55 already are.
A UBI means the ability for the politicians to give a pension to everyone. Literal guaranteed free money.
Paid for by robots. Who can’t vote*.
How exactly do you stop that, in a democracy?
*yes, indeed.
Any discussion of UBI reminds me of that 1950s sci-fi future of ten hour working weeks, flying cars and plenty for all that stubbornly refused ever to come to pass. Or, more recently, commercial self-driving vehicles and nuclear fusion power - both exactly as far away as they were five or ten years ago.
It ain't happening. The future is the remaining able bodied populace being taxed and worked to death to fund the vast hordes of the decrepit and elderly.
Wow. Your computer is certainly in a ruminative mood.
That line is perfect iambic pentameter
da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DUH
Phenomenal. 5 seconds
so how do you feel now that AI is coming for *your* job?
Kinda glad that I won't really need a career in 20 years!
And sad for all the writers, artists, painters, creators - and coders, lawyers, teachers, bankers, for that matter - who are about to see their professions annihilated, as they know them
In which case they will all vote for parties offering a universal basic income funded by a robot tax on corporations and organisations that use AI, making UBI inevitable
Good to see you coming around to that way of thinking. But I can't help thinking it will be a bit more of a struggle than you're suggesting.
Depends on the level and scale of permanent job loss, if over 50% of the electorate that is a permanent majority for UBI and a robot tax
In the event of The Singularity - AI reduces the cost of production to close to zero - there will be vast resources for politicians to redistribute. Which they will use to reward those that vote for them.
History tells us they will.
Oh great, pensions go up by 65,000% whilst the rest of us are turned into Soylent Green.
I think you misunderstood the film ...
I was being a drama queen. Though, admittedly, it also wasn't the neatest analogy available.
Poor Saj, not even getting his name spelt right in the header. And not fancying wasting the next 10 years of his life in opposition either. Labour suffered this when Mayoral positions suddenly became more attractive than shadow cabinet positions in a party led by an idiot. That's politics.
Anyone already holding or having held a prominent position is not getting another chance once the Tories are in opposition. People like Sunak are young enough to last out the period of opposition in theory, but having held the top jobs they aren't going to be the ones to revitalise things.
A classic 'the next Tory PM is not in parliament' situation.
Almost certainly not. The days when power switched often enough that the front benches of both parties had a fair smattering of cabinet experience is long gone. For whatever reason the power of incumbency has massively increased in the last 40 years and we have to get used to governments that learn on the job. Look at the current shadow bench as an example. And hanging around and getting that experience seems more of a hindrance than an asset, as Rishi shows all too well.
I agree with you that the web version is deliberately hobbled - it wasn't until I downloaded my own version of stable diffusion, ran it locally, added to the models and took out the filtering before it started responding in interesting ways to my prompts.
Interestingly stable diffusion 2.0 has had the artists taken out so you can no longer prompt it "in the style of artist x", local workarounds are easy - but the huge question mark for me is how this model performs when the gloves are off. Is it capable of critical analysis or not?
I suspect the 'uncensored' version comes bloody close.
Stable Diffusion have self sabotaged. By removing all the "style of artist" stuff and also anything remotely NSFW it is a shadow of its former self. I get that they had to do this, it was churning out amazing images but also some disturbing and "illegal" stuff. And they were getting sued by real artists for plagiarism
However the genie will burst out of the bottle again, the tech cannot be reined in for long. It is far too commercially, politically, artistically useful
AGI (or something so similar to that it doesn't matter) is coming soon
I’ve been having a go at some art using Dall E and stable diffusion.
Quite fun.
Stable Diffusion - before they crippled it last week - was glorious fun
I have been having a play. My current avatar is one of the results.
Guess the prompt.
I have no idea! Something Biblical?
My avatar was also drawn by Stable Diffusion. I like to think this is what Stable Diffusion ‘really looks like’
Two nuns sharing a bath
One says to the other: "Where's the soap"? To which the other replies: "Yes it does, doesn't it?".
An old joke which I laughed at when I was 10 but didn't actually understand until rather later.
Wow. Your computer is certainly in a ruminative mood.
That line is perfect iambic pentameter
da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DUH
Phenomenal. 5 seconds
so how do you feel now that AI is coming for *your* job?
Kinda glad that I won't really need a career in 20 years!
And sad for all the writers, artists, painters, creators - and coders, lawyers, teachers, bankers, for that matter - who are about to see their professions annihilated, as they know them
In which case they will all vote for parties offering a universal basic income funded by a robot tax on corporations and organisations that use AI, making UBI inevitable
Good to see you coming around to that way of thinking. But I can't help thinking it will be a bit more of a struggle than you're suggesting.
Depends on the level and scale of permanent job loss, if over 50% of the electorate that is a permanent majority for UBI and a robot tax
In the event of The Singularity - AI reduces the cost of production to close to zero - there will be vast resources for politicians to redistribute. Which they will use to reward those that vote for them.
History tells us they will.
Oh great, pensions go up by 65,000% whilst the rest of us are turned into Soylent Green.
Pensioners alone are not a majority of the electorate
Well, not quite yet admittedly. But, through a combination of simple demographics and tendency to bother to vote, people over 55 already are.
A UBI means the ability for the politicians to give a pension to everyone. Literal guaranteed free money.
Paid for by robots. Who can’t vote*.
How exactly do you stop that, in a democracy?
*yes, indeed.
Well, if I were the owner of a company aiming to make huge amounts of money through robotics, I would really make it a priority to acquire the means of influencing public opinion.
There was a proposal to have teams 17 to 48 playoff before the tournament proper begins, but other than that, all the other proposals involved teams playing no more than seven games (same as now).
If they go to 12 groups of four, then hopefully we won't get a round of 32 and an eighth game. It would be much better to have the eight group winners and four best runners up go through to the last 16 (it would have to be the best runners up from the first six groups and the two best from the second six groups to make the scheduling work).
The interesting thing there is that they didn't consider 12 four team groups. But I can't imagine they'll adopt a format where only the group winners are guaranteed to qualify.
Personally I detest set ups where some second place sides go through and others don’t. Not unlike the Rugby European Cup, with two best second place teams. In the rugby example it was almost always the groups with Italian teams that provided the ‘best’ second place teams, so it was luck of the draw. Of course luck still happens in the current footy set up, but it is less glaringly wrong. So either 8 groups of 4, top two go through, or have 16 groups and only the winners do.
I would dearly love to see some international sporting event run under swiss seeding rules. Does away with groups completely, every team gets a guarantee of more games, and it's much better at producing a top 8 (or 16) for the knockout rounds. The only issue up to now has been the logistics of moving teams and fans around venues, but this world cup shows you can run a major event with all the venues close together.
Wow. Your computer is certainly in a ruminative mood.
That line is perfect iambic pentameter
da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DA-da-DUH
Phenomenal. 5 seconds
so how do you feel now that AI is coming for *your* job?
Kinda glad that I won't really need a career in 20 years!
And sad for all the writers, artists, painters, creators - and coders, lawyers, teachers, bankers, for that matter - who are about to see their professions annihilated, as they know them
In which case they will all vote for parties offering a universal basic income funded by a robot tax on corporations and organisations that use AI, making UBI inevitable
Good to see you coming around to that way of thinking. But I can't help thinking it will be a bit more of a struggle than you're suggesting.
Depends on the level and scale of permanent job loss, if over 50% of the electorate that is a permanent majority for UBI and a robot tax
In the event of The Singularity - AI reduces the cost of production to close to zero - there will be vast resources for politicians to redistribute. Which they will use to reward those that vote for them.
History tells us they will.
Oh great, pensions go up by 65,000% whilst the rest of us are turned into Soylent Green.
Pensioners alone are not a majority of the electorate
Well, not quite yet admittedly. But, through a combination of simple demographics and tendency to bother to vote, people over 55 already are.
A UBI means the ability for the politicians to give a pension to everyone. Literal guaranteed free money.
Paid for by robots. Who can’t vote*.
How exactly do you stop that, in a democracy?
*yes, indeed.
Any discussion of UBI reminds me of that 1950s sci-fi future of ten hour working weeks, flying cars and plenty for all that stubbornly refused ever to come to pass. Or, more recently, commercial self-driving vehicles and nuclear fusion power - both exactly as far away as they were five or ten years ago.
It ain't happening. The future is the remaining able bodied populace being taxed and worked to death to fund the vast hordes of the decrepit and elderly.
Except that is not the issue as they will still be paid to work in that scenario and in retirement will then themselves be subsidised by the working population (beyond pensions they have saved and paid in for).
The scenario we are talking about is where most permanent paid work is replaced by AI robots, in which case the former workers will have to be supported by a UBI funded by a robot tax
Poor Saj, not even getting his name spelt right in the header. And not fancying wasting the next 10 years of his life in opposition either. Labour suffered this when Mayoral positions suddenly became more attractive than shadow cabinet positions in a party led by an idiot. That's politics.
Anyone already holding or having held a prominent position is not getting another chance once the Tories are in opposition. People like Sunak are young enough to last out the period of opposition in theory, but having held the top jobs they aren't going to be the ones to revitalise things.
A classic 'the next Tory PM is not in parliament' situation.
The difference now however is the economy is more 1970s than 1997 and so the Tories could quickly gain a poll lead if a Starmer government fails to get a grip on inflation and strikes and raises taxes. Remember too despite Brown getting only 29% in the May 2010 election by winter 2010 Ed Miliband had pushed Labour to 40%+ and level pegging or ahead of the Tories and coalition government once the government was pushing austerity
Awfully convenient for FIFA, who must be hoping to use this World Cup to expand football into Asia - the huge, lucrative Japanese and Korean markets especially
Getting football to supplant baseball in Japan would be an enormous prize. They must be getting close with drama like this. Baseball cannot provide the global excitement of football, nor the glamour of the European leagues
Bit tough on Germany and Uruguay but hey ho
Hope you aren't suggesting something about the referring?
Two crucial VAR decisions have gone in favour of Korea and Japan, both extremely questionable
It may just be the rub of the green, so be it. I'm delighted for both Korea and Japan and it is great that new nations are joining the world of football. It is the undisputed world game, the World Cup should be a global party - and it is. Even in Qatar!
Aren't goal-line decisions determined by the technology?
No, GLT is only for the goal area not the goal line. But the replays were conclusive:
I think GPT3.5 has been fed seven trillion novels, movies and plays, and it has worked out the basic algorithms of story telling. How to do twists, how to develop plots, how to create conflict between characters, how to evoke drama and tension
Fuck
Commercial creativity was screwed anyway.
We already have more good books, plays, music than even a madman could assimilate in their lifetime. Hence only a handful of people make a living by creating new stuff. Films and TV are a bit further up the doom spiral, but that's mostly about technology. Something like M*A*S*H can play forever on the upper reaches of Freeview because it's so well written. If the picture quality were better, we wouldn't need another dramedy on the madness of war and resilience of the human spirit. That's been done. Everything has been done.
Economically, that will be fine, because everything that matters will become cheap and reliable. The harder bit is what will we do all day? How will we make meaning in our lives?
It's definitely a problem - see minor royals for an extreme example of what can go wrong. But it ought to be a good problem to have. Bottom line is that, for most people, work sucks. . That's why you need to give them money to make them do it.
But if you take the meaningful pursuit of creativity out of human life, what is left?
We become passive consumers of the brilliant art produced by machines
This is going to be the biggest story of the 2020s (unless the aliens come or the bomb drops). The arrival of AGI. it dwarfs Covid. We’ve been through plagues before. We’ve never encountered anything like this. Electronic angels with supernal and inhuman powers will walk amongst us
I admit to remaining entirely unconvinced. Real creativity is done by minds, not hardware. I agree I may be wrong. King Lear or Wuthering Heights this is not.
Minds are hardware. Unless you believe in some divine spark of creativity uniquely gifted to one species of bipedal ape (why? And does this count for the whole universe?j there is no reason AGI can’t arise elsewhere. Indeed we should expect it. Surely?
Whether minds are hardware is the question, not the answer. The assertion of it does not make it true. Nor does limiting the opposition to a 'divine spark' theory.
BTW, if minds are hardware alone, which they may be (though I don't think so) then there is in principle the possibility of artificial awareness, and no reason to think it has not already been achieved.
"What's wrong with this line "the cat satted on the mat""
Answer in 1 second:
"There is nothing inherently wrong with the sentence "the cat satted on the mat." It is a grammatically correct sentence that uses proper English syntax. The only potential issue with the sentence is that the verb "satted" is not a commonly used word, so some readers may not be familiar with it. It might be more clear to use the word "sat" instead of "satted" in this sentence."
FWIW this is a wrong answer altogether. 'Sit' is a strong verb, the perfect is 'sat'. If it were a weak verb the perfect would be 'sitted' not 'satted'. (As in 'pit' 'pitted'.)
Is this the same mind that wrote that Shakesperian sonnet (post above) that was not remotely Shakesperian?
I never said it was right. I said it was interestingly wrong
As for the sonnet, if you could do better in TWO SECONDS do show us, and make sure to include lines as good as the final couplet
My pocket calculator can work out the square root of 3,645,678 in the blink of an eye, but that doesn't make it more intelligent than me.
I always assumed you were an Iain Banks fan. I thought one of the interesting things about the Culture was that Minds, humanoids and drones all existed on terms of some kind of parity, despite the disparity in their levels of intelligence.
nah in the later novels the humans were essentially pets.
Comments
If a robot can build a house 3x faster than humans, it will be able to stack and unload your dishwasher
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6s17IAj-XpU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLWXXy_BG7Y
Brazil through
Switzerland 1 Cameroon or Serb goal from possible elimination
Cameroon 1 goal from possible qualification
Serbia 1 goal from possible qualification
I suspect you might enjoy!
ChatGPT is DALL-E in its earliest incarnation. But the vast potential is obvious. And of course at the moment it is hobbled by Safe Mode. Someone will remove that, then you might see more critical and varied thought, even introspection. Plus we have GPT4 to come in a month or two
Ultimately, they want to give prizes to everyone. And this is the result.
(Jean de Florette and Manon des Sources, I mean)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_World_Cup#Best_performances_by_confederations
Of course luck still happens in the current footy set up, but it is less glaringly wrong.
So either 8 groups of 4, top two go through, or have 16 groups and only the winners do.
"What's wrong with this line "the cat satted on the mat""
Answer in 1 second:
"There is nothing inherently wrong with the sentence "the cat satted on the mat." It is a grammatically correct sentence that uses proper English syntax. The only potential issue with the sentence is that the verb "satted" is not a commonly used word, so some readers may not be familiar with it. It might be more clear to use the word "sat" instead of "satted" in this sentence."
ChatGPT has shatted its own bed there.
The problem FIFA has is that there are three motivations: expand the tournament, stick to maximum seven games per team, have a sensible group stage structure.
Rather like the three traits of production (good, fast, cheap) they can have only two.
...of fusion power stations.
(May be even the same reasons why I enjoyed it as a teenager…)
Meanwhile, UEFA are going to make the Champions League even more boring before Christmas from 2024-25. They've worked out that there's more money to be made from people who just want to watch the big teams rather than watching a game of football with a decent amount of jeopardy on it.
And anyway, thanks to a combination of age and my huge, gold-plated, yacht-buying civil service pension lump sum, I no longer have a mortgage. Eat your heart out, Rishi.
No, I mean, REALLY good
I have vague dreams of writing a mystery book one day, when the dildo making is replaced by 3D printing and DALL-E 8, and I have a plot in mind
I just asked ChatGPT for an outline, and gave it three sentences of premise. It just gave me two excellent plot developments - that I had not thought of before
Stunning
All of its knowledge was scraped off the net up to the end of July 2021, and that's that. It is closed. This gives it interesting biases, by the way. If you ask it the origin of Covid it will emphatically fall down on the side of Zoonosis at the Wet Market - which was of course the prevailing theory up to July 21, because discussion of lab leak was deliberately repressed!
It is thought (we do not know) that GPT4 will have realtime internet access - inter alia - which will make it immensely powerful
https://www.itv.com/news/2022-12-02/residents-sickened-by-botched-insulation-scheme-that-made-homes-mouldy-and-cold
I agree with you that the web version is deliberately hobbled - it wasn't until I downloaded my own version of stable diffusion, ran it locally, added to the models and took out the filtering before it started responding in interesting ways to my prompts.
Interestingly stable diffusion 2.0 has had the artists taken out so you can no longer prompt it "in the style of artist x", local workarounds are easy - but the huge question mark for me is how this model performs when the gloves are off. Is it capable of critical analysis or not?
I suspect the 'uncensored' version comes bloody close.
However the genie will burst out of the bottle again, the tech cannot be reined in for long. It is far too commercially, politically, artistically useful
AGI (or something so similar to that it doesn't matter) is coming soon
Fuck
"I don't know about Mermaids specifically, but organisations do seem to have had a tendency to essentially delegate out their policy to what seem to be lobbying organisations."
It creates obvious conflicts of interest, which the organisations in question appear wholly unable to recognise let alone mitigate. No wonder they get into trouble.
Insulation is great but homes need airflow. I put conventional insulation in my loft and needed to add lap vents to stop condensation on a really cold morning.
People have PUR foam in the loft as insulation. Wouldn’t touch it with a barge pole.
Quite fun.
Like the Americans with high speed rail, contactless credit cards or being paid your salary by direct debit.
We already have more good books, plays, music than even a madman could assimilate in their lifetime. Hence only a handful of people make a living by creating new stuff. Films and TV are a bit further up the doom spiral, but that's mostly about technology. Something like M*A*S*H can play forever on the upper reaches of Freeview because it's so well written. If the picture quality were better, we wouldn't need another dramedy on the madness of war and resilience of the human spirit. That's been done. Everything has been done.
Economically, that will be fine, because everything that matters will become cheap and reliable. The harder bit is what will we do all day? How will we make meaning in our lives?
It's definitely a problem - see minor royals for an extreme example of what can go wrong. But it ought to be a good problem to have. Bottom line is that, for most people, work sucks. . That's why you need to give them money to make them do it.
The government would be well advised to abolish non-don status before the election and replace it with a more modern system of incentives around residency similar to several
other European countries. For a start the remittance basis of taxation is a completely illogical incentive. Deter rich people from bringing their money into the UK because it’ll get taxed. Genius.
London
Lab 62%
Con 17%
LD 12%
Ref 6%
Grn 3%
Rest of South
Lab 43%
Con 26%
LD 12%
Ref 10%
Grn 5%
Midlands and Wales
Lab 42%
Con 23%
Ref 13%
Grn 7%
LD 7%
PC 5%
North
Lab 58%
Con 22%
Ref 8%
LD 6%
Grn 5%
Scotland
SNP 45%
Lab 22%
Con 14%
LD 12%
Grn 5%
Ref 2%
(YouGov / The Times; Sample Size: 1637; Fieldwork: 29-30 November 2022)
This has happened repeatedly, around the world, for a number of causes.
We become passive consumers of the brilliant art produced by machines
This is going to be the biggest story of the 2020s (unless the aliens come or the bomb drops). The arrival of AGI. it dwarfs Covid. We’ve been through plagues before. We’ve never encountered anything like this. Electronic angels with supernal and inhuman powers will walk amongst us
Is this the same mind that wrote that Shakesperian sonnet (post above) that was not remotely Shakesperian?
My son in law's father and late mother had their home's roof treated with spray foam and on putting it on the market the surveyor comprehensively damned the installation and failed the house unless the roof was completely replaced
I would warn anyone thinking of roof space 'sprayfoam' to be very careful who you employ and check with local surveyors if they would recommend it
As for the sonnet, if you could do better in TWO SECONDS do show us, and make sure to include lines as good as the final couplet
Guess the prompt.
Yes, but whose thoughts will they think?
In the old days.
Some of us will cope better with that transition than others, and that needs watching.
My avatar was also drawn by Stable Diffusion. I like to think this is what Stable Diffusion ‘really looks like’
Yet human played chess is very much alive and well.
It is a weak AI. There is a whole world of difference between the two.
History tells us they will.
Sadly, the first efforts will certainly entail a vastly complicated and utterly stupid system. As opposed to a simple UBI.
However I think this is because chess is partly sport. And in sport you must have some human involvement to get people emotionally invested
No one will care if a human or a computer wrote that excellent drama on TV. They will just want it to be better than the rest. And the computers will do it better
Blackadder: No he wasn't.
Baldrick: He was too, sir. Cause whenever he was up in court and the judge asked "occupation", he'd say "none".
Various politicians argue that
1) anything less than 100,000% is mean
2) 50,000% is enough
3) robots with penises are actually….
A classic 'the next Tory PM is not in parliament' situation.
But look on the bright side - if we hang on to First Past the Post, those who vote for the winning side will be able to have a 150% increase in pensions and 150% of their body weight in Soylent Green!
Paid for by robots. Who can’t vote*.
How exactly do you stop that, in a democracy?
*yes, indeed.
Note the last bit of Sunak's letter (addressed to my former not-very-local MP incidentally).
"This decision will not mark the end of my Parliamentary activity...."
....which I read as meaning that he's been offered a peerage if he stands down.
It ain't happening. The future is the remaining able bodied populace being taxed and worked to death to fund the vast hordes of the decrepit and elderly.
To which the other replies: "Yes it does, doesn't it?".
An old joke which I laughed at when I was 10 but didn't actually understand until rather later.
The scenario we are talking about is where most permanent paid work is replaced by AI robots, in which case the former workers will have to be supported by a UBI funded by a robot tax
BTW, if minds are hardware alone, which they may be (though I don't think so) then there is in principle the possibility of artificial awareness, and no reason to think it has not already been achieved.