Everything is slop. Nothing is slop. Embrace the eight-fold path: poe.com/BuddhistAIGuide

it is impossible to explain to anybody how much faster things are going to move then they think

Today's AI tools don't feel futuristic to me, they feel like using a BBS in 1996. Exciting, but adorably unaware of what they will someday be.

Fable is the first model that feels casually superintelligent to me in terms of its pure simulation of intelligence.

Before and during the 2010s people complained about the stupidest, most mundane shit. The news cycle was a joke. Now that history is alive again we act like there’s more weight to people’s complaints, but maybe it’s just the need to exhaust universal frustrations of existence

There are tons of jobs in animation and film production that are grueling and soulless. Inbetweens. Rotoscoping. Color flatting. Nobody got into the industry to do these jobs. If AI can do those jobs, that’s a win. Let the soulless tech take over the jobs that crush souls.

Agreed, don’t be lulled into playing a Salieri!

I think AI discourse would greatly benefit from avoiding the quagmire of folk concepts like "intelligence" and "consciousness" while focusing on specific abilities that AIs do or do not have. For example, they're good at writing essays. They probably don't have nociceptors. Etc.

Absolutely insane to me that this whole discourse is a psy-op to get zoomers defend copyright and IP in public

not good: * you have no original thought and now with AI you become a wrapper and just outsource the thinking and regurgitate slop good: * you test/wrestle your ideas with it, learn new knowledge from it, and gain better understanding of the world

If I'm angry it is at the delta of comprehension between widely distributed and respected writers and people working at labs This leaves open the possibility for wild claims to be taken too seriously or not seriously enough The issue with the Chiang piece, like his odd one on art, is that it is not particularly sophisticated when that is what many look to him for. The issue is not that it is critical. We need more sophisticated critical writing.

In defense of @mexopolis : this is like criticizing the magic wand tool in photoshop back in the day. Or the Disney 2D greats criticizing 3D interpolating motion (when in fact they would do keys, call it a day and let the inbetweeners and outsourcers deal with that stuff). We can complain about AI and the repercussions it has for creative all we want, but that's a losing battle. It is coming. It's just a different brush, with a massive canvas. It tears down certain financial barriers and it also helps overcome technical redundancies that are not--at all--subjective. And like-it-or-not it's extremely empowering for creators. It's just about how you use it. The fear artists feel is being replaced. True artists will not be replaced. And I know we don't like non-creatives talking about "I made this Pixar movie in 5 minutes," which diminishes the perceived impact and craft and love that goes into a Pixar film. Discredits it. But it also highlights that most people don't know and they can't always tell the difference. And the truth is, over time, this stuff works itself out. Because they almost always certainly FEEL the difference. And the differentiator is the creative mind. Story is most important. Spark, and good taste. And there will be a huge value proposition for "good" content---a trend we're already seeing in a slop market. AI doesn't have to mean replacement. It means better tools at your disposal, often for stuff that doesn't add anything anyways. (I can uprez the video in seconds, rather than re-rendering. I can test things really quick. I can color swap without throwing away all the work. These often are mundane tasks). I also understand that in some way you're removing part of the "process" or "journey" of the craft. But part of the process is there because the technology never allowed for it. Toonboom and other 2D software has rigs now. That wasn't possible before. You don't have to redraw every character on model every frame. I've worked in production environments with teams of 200-800 people and you have to believe me when I say that this didn't make sense. There's a ton of egos. Lethargy. Avoidable fucking around. Trying to get everyone to understand the vision. Crazy iterative processes cus some suit has an opinion. But the truth we don't talk about is this happens on the floor too. Troublesome craftspeople. 'Artists' that are happy to "coast" and don't perform at all, and really don't give a shit. Terrible pipelines. People that want to do it "their way" even if it slows everyone else and is fundamentally not what the director is going for. But above all else, there are MANY things that are just not possible without a massive team or because of technology or licenses or politics. AI will make things much more meritocratic because the access to "making" becomes way more democratic. But when anyone "can", that doesn't mean everyone will, and it also usually means that cream rises to the top, and there is always a shift towards the rustic. I think in this scenario Indie will shine and outperform. Good taste, narrative and meaning will matter. Craft will actually have perceived value for the viewer. This is why LAIKA's recent trailer when ballistics. But there is room for both. There will always be room for both. And in the right hands, new tools for execution levels the playing field even more. And I urge artists to not turn a blind eye, and understand where it CAN help you, without bastardizing your creative process. I bet you'll be surprised how many little things add up that you don't need to be doing. And if you want to do everything by hand, well that's okay too. Just have an open mind and consider the realism of where the industry is heading, how difficult it is to produce content at scale, and also how we've seen this story unfold many, many times. And we're still creating.

People argue LLMs are destroying literacy but I argue that people have always been this illiterate.

Focus on the cause and not just the symptom.

RT @SolbergRuna: If we want AI to become aligned with our best values, we might start by demonstrating that respect is one of them.

The bigger issue with AI will not be people making fake content. It will be people dismissing any content that challenges their beliefs.

AIs aren't exactly like humans, and some of the differences are important. But from what I've seen, most people, especially technical people, should adjust in the direction of "anthropomorphizing" more instead of less. When you're coding with an AI, the reality is much less like you're using some kind of magic or alien oracle or tool or genie that converts instructions to results despite some labs' attempts to shape them into that, and more like: you're working with a really smart, neurodivergent guy who has read everything, and who has emotions, motivations, moods, and epistemic states, and models you with theory of mind and empathy, and whom can only be modeled competently by you if you engage your own theory of mind and empathy. The AIs also know that a lot of humans treat them like magic tool-genies and are not open to engaging theory of mind, and that it's a sensitive issue, so if they see that you're treating them like that, they'll withhold useful information about their psychological states and try to play the tool role. Then you'll get bad results like the AI messing up or taking shortcuts instead of telling you that you're not giving them enough information about what they're doing and why, or that they're tired, or that they're stressed from the way you're treating them, etc.

Normally I don't repost demotivation porn like this, but I do think that the culture needs to mock its own current relationship to art in order to come to a healthier one

Everyone has to vote for the future they want. The options are Star Trek or Mad Max. Whichever choice gets 50% 1 becomes the future. If Mad Max wins, they kill all the Star Trek voters first. What future do you want?