top | item 40488304

(no title)

uargos | 1 year ago

Very little people seem to understand that.

And actually there is no need to go as far as “universe” to get to something that can’t be captured by language. Human existence is such an example.

For this reason I don’t think llms are going to be good film makers for instance. Sure an llm will be able to spit the scenario of the next action movie, those already seem to be automatically generated anyway. But making a film that resonates to humans takes a lot that can’t be formulated with language.

discuss

order

ben_w|1 year ago

> And actually there is no need to go as far as “universe” to get to something that can’t be captured by language. Human existence is such an example.

I don't know what you mean by that.

If you mean qualia, then sure. Unsolved and undescribed. But other than that, I think everything has a linguistic form; perhaps inefficient, but it is possible.

Separately, transformers don't have to use what humans recognise as a langue, this means they can use things such as DNA sequences and pictures. They're definitely not the final answer to how to do AI, because they need so many more examples than us, but I don't have confidence that they can't do these things, only that they won't.

aydyn|1 year ago

That's what people said about AI art, yet here we are.

Kina|1 year ago

Is where we are any good? I think one of the more germane issues with generative AI art is that it is distinctly not creative. It can only regurgitate variations of what it has seen.

This is both extremely powerful and limiting.

An LLM is never going to give you some of the most famous films like "Star Wars" which bounced around before 20th Century Fox finally took a chance on it because they thought Lucas had talent. Is what we want? A society that just uses machines to produce variations of the same thing that already exist all the time? It's hard enough for novel creative projects to succeed.

Arnt|1 year ago

Yes... I'm not sure what the archetype of intelligence is, but for practical purposes I'd say: Humans have some of it. And it's not clear to me that what humans have is very far from what AI is starting to have. The hallucinations are weird and wonderful, but so are some of the answers I saw from below-average students when I was in university. Can't tell whether the two weirdnesses are different or similar. Exciting times lie ahead.

jazzyjackson|1 year ago

ai doesn't make art tho, it paints whatever it's told to