You are here: Home Gadget Reviews

The Truth About AI Getting "Creative"

— December 10, 2022 34 comments




Let’s talk about AI Art, Lensa, ChatGPT, and why it’s all deeper than you think. Save money with Karma at …

source

Previous Article
Next Article

Recommended For You

96 Terabytes in this Compact Machine

New Final Cut 11 Has Some Big Updates!

Gaming on the BACK of the phone!

The Best EV You Can't Buy

M4 Max MacBook Pro: I'm Convinced!

A Perfect Travel Companion

About the Author: Marques Brownlee

34 Comments

  4. me: 'write a comment about the(this) youtube video "The Truth About AI Getting Creative" '

    8chatgpt:* "I found this video to be very informative and interesting. It's easy to get caught up in the hype around AI and forget that it's not capable of the same level of creativity as humans. It's important to remember that while AI can be a powerful tool, it's not a replacement for human ingenuity. Great video!"

  5. The mainstream is pretty late when it come to this field. They barely talked about it when the papers were published and only jumps on the hype train and start freaking out now that someone has turned it into a product. My friends were all like "have you seen that really cool AI lately." Me over here thinking where were you guys when I talking about this like couple years ago. It most aren't novelty, but just innovations that have been around for while packaged nicely for the laymen to consume.

  11. I think we have to be very judicial on how we use AI going forward. I'm not smart enough to know what those parameters are, but we should.

  12. I think this video goes only rubs the surface on the ethical and unethical stealing of work.
    Personally, I'm of the mind set that, when AI's become sentient, the are they reference will truly be a reference. But as it is right now, AI copies 1 to 1 the images you feed into the system, which takes away the artistic nature of imperfection of an art piece, thus not making it referenced, but stolen.
    I can reference an art piece, but unless I actually try to copy the piece, my own artistic style, intent, creativity will make the reference into to something new 99/100 times.
    While the AI just makes a collage of different paintings and then smudge them together.
    I'm all for AI art in the future. But I think you need to license the artworks. Similar to the AI Music industry. Since the music industry is so hard when it comes to copyright and such, the AI Music devs need to commission musicians to write music for the AI, for it to then recreate the Genre etc.
    Art should be handled the same way.

  13. Same reason to why AI won't be replacing developers. I'm a CS student myself and a lot of people has been worrying about AI replacing developers in the near future, mostly because of chatGPT becoming public. These kinds of AI's has been a thing for a while already, just not as convenient and easy to use as chatGPT. AI lacks creativity and when it solves/answers a question it's just searching its database for something that would fit what you are asking it. It's not self-aware and can't come up with new solutions just like you and me can't come up with a new colour if someone asked us to. Thats why it's making obvious mistakes at times, it makes an educated guess based on it's data.

  14. I don’t like the “I own the style of art”. Like stfu. That’s the same problem with copyright. People need to stfu. If it isn’t exactly the same picture, it isn’t their art. Simple as that

  15. Oh my god love the intro, was about to comment hope you'd get proven wrong, because I think humans aren't magically sentient or creative but rather a super complex logic machine. So if you get a very sophisticated metal unfeeling computer, but have it learn about humans, then in theory it could absolutely replicate exactly a human with a unique identity and philosophy and be creative etc

    And the intro did pretty much """confirm""" that! Well not quite – it's possible humans somehow are creative – that they can invent ideas from nothing – that true randomness is real – but I'd hope it's not that way, and that it's all deterministic, and that computers can simulate existence entirely!

    -Seeing it as a tool, hopefully it could be smart enough to replicate a human truly and accurately. Write a script for youtube or tiktok, generate a false human image, convert the image to a 3d model, get the 3d model to express itself/gesture appropiate to it's script, generate apprpiate background content, then bam! An ai generated video that if good enough, completely indistinguishible from a real human's video.
    Might be scary and fear of a dystopia but I think that's the future. Imagine if the future is you're not using the internet to discuss with humans, but you're using your personal AI as an extension of your brain to completely indulge yourself in knowledge andor entertainment
    Could also get super smart AI to take over many jobs, which would evolve humanity yet again – instead of slaving at an office etc you're studying up on how to further better superior computers
    It sounds fascinating to have a world ruled by ai (and hopefully no government spying on you, or big companies manipulating you, though that will innevitably continue to happen sadly), where it's no longer humans solving the worlds problems and becoming a better species, that's the ai's job. Instead the humans job perhaps is just to monitor the AI, and then relax. Chill out in paradise, with no work or responsibilities. Where atleast digitally, anything your stupid organic mind could think of, would come to being

    I guess it's so interesting because in many ways ai would be if improved, superior to humans. And that's not something to be upset about, since we get to control the humans. We create god, and dictate what our god does for us. And that's possible!! Well not if there's ww3 or if somehow the world can't figure to solve the misery in africa etc.. but hey the future is damn interesting

  18. I see artists getting mad at this kind of AI and ML models but, do you have to pay for copyright for seeing a painting in a museum and afterwards painting one yourself on the same or similar style?
    This models are doing the exact same thing but much faster than any human

  19. The whole inspiration thing to me is the most difficult part of this debate. Its basically a Philosophical debate over what is inspiration.

  23. So, the problem that people need to trust you when you say I draw it of course it would be a lie, but best to assume positive, but of course, it would be a lie, but know the person well and accept their statement. So, don't assume and invest to confirm so it is accurate. Best to accept it as true since it is truth that you are aware but not the lie that you are not aware of. So, come back need to trust what they say by assuming a positive base on yourself to respond in a positive way, not a negative way.

    So, why did AI get it wrong every human's statement should be right, but not wrong like the above video say is wrong?

  25. ChatGPT's disclaimer says that it has no knowledge of things after 2021. So while I agree that it does output factually wrong things, it's not exactly fair to ask about the iPhone 14 Pro and expect correct information.

  28. AI:
    2020s neat tools, lots of errors
    2030s I just tell the AI what I want and then approve when it’s done
    2050s why would you ever trust a human to do anything?

  29. It's not really about copyright infringement, it's more like unlicensed use of data.

    It's more like the terms and agreement when we are registering an account to some sites. We agree if they use our data that we upload to them.

    Some artist don't agree to let their artwork (as data) to be used by ai companies.

Comments are closed.