EDIT: LINK - https://reddit.com/r/SneerClub/comments/yodmju/i_really_thought_this_was_a_brilliant_satire_at/
The uber-cool techbro is in the comments giving us such gems as:
I stand by what I said. People will implement it soon, if they haven’t already. Aesthetic rating networks are a thing, and image generators are capable of combinatorial generalization, so it’s probably possible to use search (or maybe even gradient descent) to find images that are better than the ones in the training set (according to the metric), and then train it with those. The success of these techniques depends on the critic not being goodharted, so the results might be inferior to training it with human-curated data, but that is more expensive. Is there any flaw in this reasoning?
When asked what in the living hell is an “aesthetic rating network” he replied:
Take a set of prompts. Generate many images for each. Select the best ones according to the network as long as they are sufficiently realistic (according to the generator or other net) and still match the prompt. Finetune on those. Or something like that
My criteria for best image is whatever someone considers the best image. This varies between people, but models can take this into account. Other areas of art (all of them?) also follow the pattern of there being a data structure that people can prefer over others, and optimizing it is a problem that machines will eventually basically solve.
I’m not mistaken. People have preferences over trajectories reality can take. Part of that considers whether what they see is pretty (but obviously art is about more than that). If you want to solve art (or understand it properly at all) you need access to that rating function. You can do it by either studying the brain directly or by observing human behavior (like the score they give to an image) and fitting a model to reconstruct that part of their minds. I’m pretty sure the vast majority of artists don’t think about art this way, but that’s how you study it in mathematical terms.
:chefs-kiss:
I love techbrains. They’re so unused. Completely fresh and wrinkle-free.
I first came at modeling from ecology, where I learned the most important thing you can learn about modeling:
"All models are wrong. Some models are useful."
I remember hearing that from some old head and a relaxed smile stretching across my face. then I looked over at this absolute psycho who was obsessive about developing some master model that would account "for everything " in this extremely complex system we were investigating. he looked like he just swallowed a turd sideways.
People really do be thinking we can build a universe simulator which takes up less space than the universe.
:screm-a: :aaaa: The level of confidence this absolute dunce has when talking about machine learning and computer science in general is infuriating.
My guy just saw a video about GANs and thinks he can SOLVE ART holy shit. This is not just disdain for the humanities/arts, this is a fundamentally incurious person
It cannot be overstated how much good a single nuke on silicon valley would do.
They said it themselves, people have preferences over which trajectory reality can take.
You'd need a wider range, because I guarantee this galaxy brain isn't working in the valley.
Technology already solved art?? It's called a camera. You can take a picture of something and get an image much faster than someone could paint it, and it'll be more accurate too. That's why no art has been made in the past 200 years or so.
Actually quantum mechanics proofed that you can't actually do art as any photograph or capture of something does change and thus alter its state, replication of the exact conditions on the macroscopic level of humans being impossible that way.
Also art is exactly about replicating things or displaying them slightly altered. /s
One time I saw "art" of a horse where it had wings. A horse with wings. If you're going to spend that much time drawing something, maybe do some basic research into the subject matter, like have they ever seen a horse? They don't have wings (obviously lol), but they're also super heavy and not aerodynamic at all so even if they had them they wouldn't be functional. The wings were super detailed too, they could've saved a ton of time and effort if the artist just like, knew anything about horses or basic physics.
Since a horse is fundamentally just an equilayeral triangle maybe if you fold her a certain way iy will be more aerodynamic?
Horses are equilateral triangles filled with water. Maybe if you could find a way to replace their bodily fluids with something lighter... hey do you wanna invest in a startup?
But how much of those fluids are just filler? Maybe our startup can remove some, streamlining the horse.
Art is about le sexy and/or grimdark portrayals of le rare gem bideo game female waifus. :so-true:
On the one hand, if these AI models get better at making big bazonga anime waifus i would feel better about the poor human artists who used to be comissioned to make them before.
On the other hand, many of these artists rely on thirsty comissions to pay the bills, so idk.
Under a communist society, would we devote resources to training/maintaining AIs that are able to perpetuate harmful, objectifying images?
I'm legit asking, because I feel like it would be like banning brushes or typewriters kind of paranoid, fascist censorship levels, and ideally we wouldn't have people coming up with these ideas in the first place, but it is still a mental experiment i kind of struggle with.
haven't seen his 'monarchy makes money for the UK' shit or his Big Brain 'I want to be immortal' shit?
I have a friend who is obsessed with his channel and sent me that shit when I said the monarchy should be abolished :deeper-sadness:
i dont care about their public finances i care that these dessicated corpses have unelected authority over multiple nations :lenin-rage:
principles have you fucking heard of them :anglo-burn:
(and as wise skull-boys have pointed out the monarchy does not actually break even)
you know if it was a tiny country who got a massive grift out of having a guy with a cool hat on a 'throne', that's one thing
but the whole argument that americans visit english castles because its an actual monarchy rather, you know, the blokes speaking english and britain having a tad more influence than, say, le france is a bit weird
le Royals makes moneys by attracting tourists
France, Italy, Greece, Germany... Countries famous for being completely shunned by tourists.
Tourists doesn't visit palaces because there are "real" royals in them. They visit them to see the art and architecture and feel closer to important historical events by being in the place they happened. In fact, having inbred racist nonces live in those palaces for free means that there is less palace to show to the tourists. "That fancy building? Yeah, there's tons of cool stuff you can see inside" is a much more attractive offer than "That fancy building? You can't go there, king Bob lives there"
Share him Shaun's response to cgp https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiE2DLqJB8U
Seen the monarchy one, it was just standard liberal brainworms. Don't remember the immortality one but I assume it's standard techbro "we will upload our minds to computers" bullshit.
But dismissing the science of linguistics entirely because... we have shitty machine translation that works good enough to smooth over transactions? Another fucking level of stupidity altogether.
Another good example is his how to solve traffic problems which is a) autonomous cars, allthough I feel that can be forgiven, and b) doesn't include a single mention of any traffic participants but a car and would make literally every single intersection impossible to cross without being in one
I've talked and argued with that tier of bazinga years ago. Some of them also want to "solve" pets. And by "solve" they mean exterminate them and replace them with plastic trash in the vague shape of pets. They're beyond persuasion. They're like the Borg but worse. :no-mouth-must-scream:
Bazingas will unironically look you dead in the eye and claim that they are champions of rugged individualism but are obsessed with attaining "perfection". It's only a matter of time before they start relating to Light Yagami with zero self-awareness.
It’s only a matter of time before they start relating to Light Yagami with zero self-awareness.
I know some weebs who already do. :pathetic:
This is what happens to your brain when you offload all of your critical thinking skills to Google search results.
People are probably sick of my hair-brained Dune takes but this is literally the Machine Logic; when we lose the capacity to think and feel like humans, because we must live our lives within the machine that we have created.
Give me space worm cocaine and I'll listen to you advocate for a Butlerian Jyhad all day
It is reassuring to know that they're so ignorant of history and culture that when we purge them they will have to develop defenses against tactics like "Sneaking behind someone" and "Throwing rocks at their head" from first principles.
This guy might be the dumbest person on the planet
Also, give us the link :LIB:
Here’s the link
https://www.reddit.com/r/HobbyDrama/comments/yl5k80/comment/iv1f9zm/
Go bully that fucking nerd.
the existence of those videos of anime fights upscaled to 4k and 60 fps should singlehandedly disprove the concept of objectivity in art criticism. ugly as sin, and yet they all have millions of views. there are episodes of the 1979 mobile suit gundam anime with less frames than one of those 2 minute fight scenes that still manage to tell complete, emotional, dramatic and compelling stories, and still have decent fights in them.
... Yes because it is all about basic quantitation and flat measurement, not a qualitative and dynamic exploration of the phenomenological experience of being human/alive in general. These people are literally the same people that Marx and Freddy complained about when they talked about vulgar materialists.
Dae le humans are nothing but le meat computers dae love is chemicals and by that implying such things are meaningless unlike le stem :soypoint-1: :reddit-logo: :soypoint-2:
Good old fashioned 'the tool and its product are the same thing' thinking....
There's space for interesting artistic exploration using ML-driven art tools (don't ask me, ask the artists I work with. They are already making use of ML-driven tooling to speed up parts of their workflow and spare them boilerplate work), but those tools don't and can't make art, and they never will. They can make pictures, sure, but they do a really bad job of it, and they'll never be able to take 'producing an image' to 'art' because art isn't just the mechanical act of representation, it is intrinsically human.
I think language being taught in school is fine but honestly we go about it in bad ways. Obviously cool and good, literacy and helping children grow vocabulary through expanding their reading. Bad and lame: having children memorize vocabulary lists and do spelling bees. Spelling is not actually important to comprehensive writing this has been proven over and over again and mostly it is learned naturally through reading and writing. People become more literate through reading faster. Language is about context and context and use drives vocabulary acquisition.
Also, this is a personal soapbox for me on this issue but IT IS A FUCKING CRIME THAT WE DO NOT TEACH SIGN LANGUAGE TO EVERY CHILD. Sign language is cool, inclusive and USEFUL! Most countries have their own sign language. Here in America we have ASL and it is dope and interesting and actively being developed even today. Learn a sign language. Be cool. Sign to your friends in a noisy club. Across a parking lot. Say things discretely to each other without others hearing. Oh, and maybe make a deaf friend or something.
Say things discretely to each other without others hearing.
Doesn't this kind of fall apart a lot if everybody knows sign language
No, why would it? People need to see it to understand it and there are situations where you can't speak to someone across the room without others hearing but you can throw signs behind their backs.
Come on think about it for even 5 seconds my person.
Well you can talk in secret code that non-deaf adults over a certain age wouldn't know since they wouldn't have learned it in school and you would have
Or, you know, do signs where others can't see but would otherwise hear you. You can talk to people discretely even though all the hearing people around you all speak the language. It works in a similar way with sign language.
I think language being taught in school is fine but honestly we go about it in bad ways.
Yep, it takes significant time investment absorbing that language, between reading and listening and a couple of hours per week is never going to be enough.
It is hilarious how these people go from basic premises to the most absurd conclusions.
"Oh yes of course schools don't do a good job teaching foreign languages... THEREFORE the obvious solution is a live Google Universal Translator subscription so you'll never ever hear or see anyone speak anything expect English ever again!"
