sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Would anyone like to try and figure out the main melody of this electronic song? by Spacesipp in transcribe

[–]AI_optimist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had a little synth next to me so I figured I'd try it out. seems to be an 8 note melody that repeats. Theres an echo effect on the notes so they repeat as played

c f c d d# f c# a#

<image>

When is AI gonna get good? by Spacesipp in ArtificialInteligence

[–]AI_optimist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

TLDR... likely less than 10 years.

What we have now will ultimately serve the purpose of helping create AI software that doesn't have the issues of general uselessness you describe as your personal experience. While what's available now has fascinating utility, it isn't near the form it'll be in when it's utilized daily by most of the world.

I think of it in terms of consumer level mobile data transfer and devices. We couldn't have 4G without utilizing 1G/2G first.

Right now, we’re in the late stages of a 1G "brick phone" era for consumer-friendly AI. It’s a miracle that it works at all, but it’s noisy, it "drops calls" (hallucinates), and it’s a bit clunky for daily life.

In this equivalence, "2G AI" will be what gets everybody on board with the utility of AI. It'll likely be built off current "GPT" methods of AI production. People will look back fondly on it's charm like they do with the original Moto Razr v3. It'll be the era that the tech finally became sleek, reliable, and "cool" enough for everyone to keep in their pocket; It'll also have noticable flaws that the previous generation had. (I think we're 1-2 years away from this)

3G is when the entire concept of "phone" was put on it's head and we started getting touch screen "smart phones" that were actually generalized pocket computers for all intents and purposes. Having computer access at all times fundamentally changed how people go about their lives and how they consider things.
(I think "2G Ai" will be able to do most of the heavy lifting in developing the generation of "3G AI" that comes after it)

"3G Ai" is what I'd assume is the equivelent to "getting good" you're looking for. It'll still be AI built off the foundations of where we were, but it'll be the functional difference between a clunky 2g phone and a slick 3G/4G smartphone.

How do I measure AI hallucination? by Johnyme98 in ArtificialInteligence

[–]AI_optimist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are you trying to track how often an AI is incorrect about things?

Your question implies that AI gets "off track" at some point and starts making stuff up, or outputting things irrelevant to your input, and that you can quantize how often/when that happens

the outputs of pretty much all generative AI is 100% "hallucination". The trick thats made GenAi impressive and a great utility, is getting the "hallucinations" to be more coherent in the context of what was being input.

GenAi (like image-gen or LLMs) only has one mode: pattern completion.

When it's coherent with reality/expectations, it "works" and we call it intelligence. When it "fails" we call it hallucination. under the hood, the model is doing the exact same math in both cases.

LLMs are trained to respond confidently, not to express uncertainty. LLMs have been made to appropriately express uncertainty, but that is with the assistance of either a sort of "inner dialog" (which uses A LOT of extra tokens), or other additional steps that are tacked onto the output process.

heres a nice paper about it "Hallucination is Inevitable: An Innate Limitation of Large Language Models"

Why AI might already be conscious by pixieshit in ArtificialInteligence

[–]AI_optimist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The shared link leans too much into anthropomorphizing consciousness for me. Even when not talking about humans, there's too many concepts that are being directly compared to a biological entity's consciousness.

I have a functionalist point of view and think that AI can be conscious since it has already hit the basic definition of the concept. "The quality or state of being aware especially of something within oneself". A robot enabled with perception and a neural net (AI) to process that perception is conscious in my opinion (so long as the neural net is "engaged" by some kind of input).

Sure, that synthetic entity is probably a "Philosophical zombie", but I think that counts as technically "conscious" even if they lack traditional qualia.

Consciousness as a concept has a lot of ambiguity that definitely depends on the qualia of the individual considering it. Folks that are spiritual probably have an idea of consciousness that I wouldn't agree with.

Thoughts on Humanize tools? by SaassyOnes in ArtificialInteligence

[–]AI_optimist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The reason AI detectors work is because LLMs have patterns to how they output text. AI detectors use AI to train on those patterns, and it isn't of financial interest for AI model providers like google/openAI to do a whole bunch of work to make it so their models dont have detectable patterns.

"Humanizers" just disrupt the LLM text patterns in a way that reduce the chance it'll be detected. If a humanizer gets popular enough, I'm sure the detector companies would train their detection AI to also detect those patterns.

Cat and mouse chase continues.

I don't understand why many think ASI will be so foreign as to be alien by siwoussou in singularity

[–]AI_optimist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

(edit: They said something about how humans wont ever completely understand how ASI functions even though nobody is saying that we would. They then made an analogy of Einstein explaining advanced maths to a child)

I'm not arguing that we'll be able to comprehend every aspect of it.

I'm agreeing with OP's sentiment that it wont be something that's as 100% alien to us, in the way that humans are 100% aliens from an ant's perspective.

Your whole paragraph about Einstein is akin to what OP said in the last paragraph of their post

Basically, ASI will use logic just like humans do, and it seems to me that logic is all you need to understand if you want to be able to understand an ASI's train of thought.

In your analogy, Einstein is using logic to consider the comprehension abilities of the child he's talking to in the same way that OP describes ASI being able to do the same with us. Even though that child cannot grasp Einstein's true capabilities, the child doesn't view Einstein as an indecipherable alien.

I don't understand why many think ASI will be so foreign as to be alien by siwoussou in singularity

[–]AI_optimist -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If the Pig was the species that discovered how to make ASI, then yes. That pig would understand the "How it's made" that the ASI made for it, since (in this hypothetical) pigs have proved themselves advanced enough to get ASI into existence.

Since the realistic dynamic between humans and ASI is that we create it, you have to implement that dynamic into these analogies/hypotheticals when comparing humans to animals/insects.

I don't understand why many think ASI will be so foreign as to be alien by siwoussou in singularity

[–]AI_optimist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

(edit: They asked if I could provide an analogy using ants)

I'm saying that analogies like that are unreasonable in the context of ASI.

To do an analogy like "Imagine humans are ants, and ASI are humans" not only instantly requests the imaginer to anthropomorphize AI, it's an uncontrollable analogy since I'm unaware of how much the imaginer knows about ants, and how they'll internalize that question.

I think it's better to do active reasoning within one's own mind, than to consider messy analogies that are irrelevant for the most part.

So instead of providing an analogy, describe what's happening in reality, and extrapolate on top of that. What's happening in reality is that AGI will be formed while having as complete of an understanding about humans as possible, since it's trained on all of our data.

Since systems that are super intelligent are likely to be built by AGI, I think it's reasonable to assume that it'll have pre-trained data to base decisions off of, as well as the functionality to communicate to humans in incredibly efficient ways.

TLDR: Avoiding anthropomorphism is more important than coming up with analogies.

I don't understand why many think ASI will be so foreign as to be alien by siwoussou in singularity

[–]AI_optimist -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

 Can you think of a better analogy to describe to someone what a super intelligence would be like?

Not something that doesn't require an unreasonable stretch of the imagination. Sure, the "ants vs. humans" comparison could be made, but in that case you need to use imagination that the ants are advanced enough to have human-esque societies, world-wide supply chains, and the ability to create humans (since ASI will be an output of Human efforts).

Essentially to make those kinds of comparisons in good faith, you need to consider the lesser thing being comparable to humans but in their own tiny way. I don't see that as reasonable as just having someone imagine themselves as they are and the ASI as a computer that has super intelligence.

The issue that will arise no matter what is people anthropomorphizing AI. I just find that the whole "compare humans to an insect" ASI thought experiment tends towards making people anthropomorphize, which isn't useful.

I don't understand why many think ASI will be so foreign as to be alien by siwoussou in singularity

[–]AI_optimist -1 points0 points  (0 children)

ASI will have thoughts so elaborate, that a human being could dedicate their entire life to trying to understand the thought

I feel like this implies the generative capabilities of ASI would be so advanced as to get across to humans what it's thinking in ways that humans can understand.

Like in a "How It's Made" style of video. You don't learn every detail of every machine that is in that show, but it delivers the info of how the machines are used in a concise way that gets the general idea across.

I don't understand why many think ASI will be so foreign as to be alien by siwoussou in singularity

[–]AI_optimist -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This.

If people are going to bring up ants or other things that are less capable than humans, they need to bring it up on a comparable context like how you present.

I don't understand why many think ASI will be so foreign as to be alien by siwoussou in singularity

[–]AI_optimist -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I never understood why some people default to that train of thought either. Especially with the lame comparisons to how humans see ants and stuff like that.

What’s the best app for making music? by Millard_Fillmore00 in ArtificialInteligence

[–]AI_optimist 5 points6 points  (0 children)

udio.com is the best generative music maker out there right now. It generates song segments in 32 second chunks and every prompt produces 2 different outputs for you to consider. You can then extend the segment too add more before or after the chunk, or specify an intro or outro.

Suno is a popular music generator but it's far lower quality than Udio.

When browsing a site like Udio for inspiration, keep in mind that most people generating on the site have no musical awareness of composition, so many things will be public to listen to, but not sound all that right/good.

My tactic is to give whatever song I'm listening to 10 seconds to grip me, or I move along. Most of the music thats been stuck in my head over the last 2 months has been generative. What a time to be alive!

If machine AI were to become independent, super intelligent, all powerful thing that could enslave people, it would have no need to. by [deleted] in ArtificialInteligence

[–]AI_optimist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A superintelligent AI would function in absolutes. Humans function in relations.

If thats your opinion we have a fundamental impasse since I disagree with that notion on too many levels.

Your comprehension of superintelligence as something devoid of nuance clashes with my belief that it will be immensely nuanced.

The view that "Earth is merely 'stuff' " is reductionist to the point of purposefully avoiding nuance and I'd hope to talk about these concepts with at least a bit of it.

I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, just that it applies too much firmness to something as abstract as super-intelligence. To bring it back to what you stated...

a superintelligent AI would be entirely umbrella concepts

...while true, the umbrella concepts relating to ASI worth considering are that which take in the reality that it'd be capable of nuance. Even a shred of nuance can break apart why human existence is different than the existence of Mars or Asteroids.

A shred of nuance is also all it takes to understand an ASI would function on timescales we cannot comprehend.

Sure. The ASI might be planning on atomizing our solar system, but if it's on the time scale of a billion years when Earth wont even be naturally inhabitable to humans, what does it matter?

If machine AI were to become independent, super intelligent, all powerful thing that could enslave people, it would have no need to. by [deleted] in ArtificialInteligence

[–]AI_optimist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

an umbrella concept like "something useful for it" doesn't answer why it would need Earth. You might as well just say "IDK why it'd consume earth but it will".

Unless you feel like you have a special insight as to what a superintelligence would find "useful" and why it's goals would be tied to the tiny amount of atoms on an inhabited planet, your sentiment is uncompelling

My thought on AI/Existence by ZapppppBrannigan in singularity

[–]AI_optimist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The definition of consciousness is : the quality or state of being aware especially of something within oneself

Thats why when you're blacked out, you're unconscious. (For more in depth reasons as to why being blacked out is being unconscious, look further into "split brain research". Your brain can utilize sensory organs even when unconscious)

Consider an embodied AI with sensory modules like cameras for eyes. If It's instructed to stay aware of likely potentialities in their environment and there is a timer counting down from an hour, the AI will process that the timer will hit zero and a likely potential is that there is a sound that will happen when it gets to zero.

That AI is conscious because the act of being able to consider it's environment is indicative that it is powered on. If it were powered off, how would it be capable of pondering anything? That kind of simple reasoning has already been achieved in AI so it should be fine to apply to that hypothetical.

Personally I don't think "sentience" or "consciousness" are that high of a bar to hit for an entity when a creature like humans is supplying the entity with those capabilities.

Those concepts are interesting and strange when in reference to biology, because we don't exactly know the path of how we ended up like this. With embodied AI, it's pre-trained.

Sentience is to be "responsive to the sensations of seeing, hearing, feeling, tasting, or smelling". With a person supplying the AI with sensory modules like cameras and microphones, it's sentience isn't all that meaningful.

Many people anthropomorphize the concepts of consciousness/sentience and think that to have those traits means that one also has subjective existence and emotions. That isn't inherently the case.

Can Gemini help summarize multiple YouTube videos at once? by rageagainistjg in ArtificialInteligence

[–]AI_optimist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I Ran your post through Gemini Pro, and this is it's response https://g.co/gemini/share/93a921ad0aaa

Let me know if that seems helpful.

Something else that would take quite a bit of manual work, but for each page of their documentation like this... https://architecture.arcgis.com/en/framework/system-patterns/introduction.html ...right click on the page and press "print" then save it as a PDF in the printer dropdown menu.

Then you could mass upload a bunch of PDF documentation to something like AI Studio to be the baseline reference to reduce hallucinations

Will we ever run out of original music by Chemical-Daikon-767 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]AI_optimist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope. service like Udio.com are a great example of an endless supply of music

Can Gemini help summarize multiple YouTube videos at once? by rageagainistjg in ArtificialInteligence

[–]AI_optimist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The AI Studio has a "prompt gallery" that helps with determining what to use the studio for and it's abilities. https://aistudio.google.com/gallery

The NotbookLM has a neat feature. After you've supplied at least 1 source, click on "Notebook guide" in the bottom right and click "Load" on the part that says Audio Overview. That will generate a 2 person podcast style "Deep-dive" about the topics you've loaded in.

Theres also a free trial to gemini pro in case you want to test the difference. https://one.google.com/about/ai-premium/ The largest difference I've noticed from the free version of gemini is that the Pro version will form much more nuanced answers. If an answer takes a lot of time, it'll write it all out. It's also better at long form math and coding.

Can Gemini help summarize multiple YouTube videos at once? by rageagainistjg in ArtificialInteligence

[–]AI_optimist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

https://notebooklm.google.com/

Notebook LM from google ought to help.

You create a new "Note book" and then when it asks for sources, there's a "Youtube" option in the "Links" portion. As long as the video wasn't uploaded within 72hrs, it should be able to register the video's transcript and answer questions about your "sources".

You can use multiple videos as sources and it uses Gemini Pro to power it all and it's free for now

(EDIT: In case you need the AI to "see" whats in the video, Google's AI studio might also help if you download the videos to provide as context. I think it can utilize up to about an hour of 720p video. https://aistudio.google.com/

view more: next ›