[nobut8]

Not sure what these cars are all about. Everyone travels by horse and buggy…

We’re building a model optimized for the machine, not people.

Artists can go collect clay to sculpt and flowers to convert to paint. Computers are their own context and should not be romantically anthropomorphized

In the same way fewer and fewer people go to church, fewer and fewer will see the nostalgia in being a data entry worker all day. Society didn’t stop when we all got our first beige box.

[bugglebeetle]

This is an incredibly dull, unthinking regurgitation of the nonsense people say online to feel better about their own lack of creative ability. My point wasn’t that computers can’t do the same thing as artists (they already can), it’s that computers won’t achieve the same result by having people describe the images they want to see because that’s fundamentally not how images are made or even perceived.

[poojf]

I play three instruments, draw, sculpt, and used to build houses.

No one ever set a goal for AI to achieve the same result; just replace labor.

Your post is the same dull strawman non-engineers (I also have a BSc in engineering and MSc in math) repeat about AI.

Find me a formal proof of how “images are made” and I’ll show you one possible model of an infinite number of possible models to explain it with a few axiomatic correct twists to the math since all of our symbolic logic is a leaky abstraction that fails to capture how anything is “fundamentally made”.

Pretentious semantic wank is all you’re shipping