• DreamButt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I love this channel! Her discussions on the toxic culture in physics departments was both heart breaking and really brave. That said I had a feeling this particular video might be a bit out of scope, but I might give it a try since it sounds like y’all enjoyed it

    (Random, but wanted to add that her rant about robots in movies being bad tools is hilarious)

      • DreamButt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Honestly I’m not surprised. Lemmy has a lot of very literal well actually types. Many of them seem more mature and older so at least partially aware of themselves. But in general it still feels like a systemic issue. Wouldn’t be surprised if anyone here would be the type to respond to the video on robots in movies with something like well, duh! robots _have_ to look like that because of the writing. It humanizes them. Just totally missing the fact that she’s clearly a very intelligent person and is very aware of the basic facts of the situation just like everyone else is

        • Chocrates@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah I watched about half of it, it is a long one. She very clearly defines what she means and states her reasons and opinions.
          I agree she is not a Comp Sci Doctorate in Machine Learning but she doesn’t claim to be.
          Seems to be a good video on a contentious topic and whether people agree or not I don’t think she was misrepresenting anything.

    • FringeTheory999@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      right, that’s only true in the actually literally completely true sense. I have a love hate relationship with AI, I use several of them. As far as I’m concerned AI stands for “assets and inspiration” because that’s the only use for it. It can generate royalty free assets to chop up and use in art, and it can help brainstorm ideas if you’re feeling uninspired, but it’s actually really terrible at creating anything new or interesting on it’s own. There’s a difference between art and content. And what AI generates is content. Stuff to fill space. It’s not going to replace novelists any time soon, but if you make your living writing meaningless ad copy that just fills space then your job is in serious trouble. It can’t create art because messaging is a fundamental part of art and AI has nothing to say. Artists and writers do a lot more than just regurgitate their influences and copy patterns. They also have a point to make. When you engage with a piece of art, the artists is trying to say something, make commentary on the world, or evoke a specific emotional response in the audience. There is intention in art, but “AI” in it’s current and likely in it’s future state is incapable of approaching any task with intention. It’s just a machine learning tool spitting out formulaic patterns. It’s great if you want to create 250 stylized variations of the letter “B”, so artists can use AI to speed up their brainstorming phase and thus it can be a useful tool for artists, but it will never create anything new or interesting without a heaping helping of human interference.

      AI will be writing shitty superhero movies that fill up space for the next thousand years, because those kinds of movies are just content. Aesthetically pleasing content, but still just content. It’ll never write anything that you haven’t seen a hundred times before.