#didn’t think my opinion on ai would ever be relevant on this blog | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

notherpuppet · 4 months ago

Note

What is your opinion of AI? Personally, I think that like any technology, it depends on the user and their intentions, but that is just me.

What about you?

1. Theft

The most central issues with AI as it is now is that the programs were trained/are trained with STOLEN art. Stolen visual art, music, writing, etc.

The vast majority of what it has been fed is stolen. As in, the artists behind the work were not ever given the chance to consent nor be compensated for their works being used to feed the machine.

This reason alone is straight up copyright infringement and the optimist in me does believe the long arm of the law is gonna shut these programs down for that. But the long arm of the law is looooooong, and the technology is disrupting people’s livelihoods now. Unlike robots or machinery that was invented and built to expedite assembly line/factory work, this technology is only functional by using other people’s labor. If we didn’t live in a society where you have to “earn” your right to live in it, then this would still be wrong, but it probably wouldn’t be such an existential problem.

There are active class action lawsuits for infringement of copyright. And the private sector has begun filing suits and I’m quite certain they’ll win because again—it’s simply theft. These companies did not make licensing contracts, they’re not paying royalties to the artists they stole from.

So if you consider using ai that generates “art” (whether it is visual, music, writing, etc.) please consider stopping immediately, as you would actively be benefiting from theft (which is wrong imo!!!!)

2. AI in its present form dishonors the human spirit

In my personal relationship with AI technology, I do not use it to generate ideas or ‘art’. I detest the notion to use technology in that way tbh. AI is a form of technology, so it’s difficult to break it down into every specific use it actually has. But here’s an attempt; no to generative AI, okay to certain AI.

There are kinds of AI programming in the programs I use (such as features that help you color in a shape quickly or make a perfect circle). This is useful tech (that requires zero IP theft) and I like it because it helps me by taking care of tedious tasks so that I have more time to spend in the creative and drawing processes. But I still choose the colors, I still draw the images, I still write the stories.

I think the way AI is used right now with a focus on “creative thinking” (where it’s not actually creating anything it’s just churning out other people’s *stolen* ideas and practice) is a total waste. AI being used as an assistant to help humans find information easily can be/has been swell. And requires no theft :D

But for whatever reason (greed, capitalism are my guesses), tech companies are leaning into a direction to replace creativity with AI?? I imagine the people behind this view the practice of art as tedious work because it is challenging??

But the beauty of art and the practice of it is that it allows humans to experience and overcome challenges with little to no stakes.

When society determines that is not a valuable use of human time, then I think we’ll all be significantly more miserable. If we allow a machine to be “creative” and leave us to only experience challenges with stakes—like survival (rent, putting food on the table).

So here are some examples of how I feel about AI uses;

AI to translate languages, find resources, discern malicious malware/spam from harmless messages > 👍🏽

AI to generate ideas/art for you > 🤢 Why??????? Why would you want that…that’s the most exceptional part of the human experience and you relinquish it to a bot trained on stolen ideas? 😭

#didn’t think my opinion on ai would ever be relevant on this blog #but since people have taken my shit and put it in ai #and I’ve seen more ai images of HAZBIN characters #I guess it has become relevant #this blog is anti-ai ‘art’#so if you’re into ai ‘art’#PLEASE GTFO

1K notes · View notes

theothin · 11 months ago

Text

And I’d expect people who have followed my blog to understand my POV on art more since I talk about it quite regularly and yet here we are!

I don't think I've ever followed your blog. I remember interacting positively with you in the past, but I don't follow many people.

-I- don’t just replicate and vomit it back up. And I do art that is freakin derivative as HELL and can STILL explain all sorts of symbolism and choices made to create it the way it was created. assuming that’s “all” artist do that is not only disrespectful to artist but to art as a whole. If some artist do nothing but replicate…that’s on them, but with respect to the artist of that comic, if all they are bringing to their art is copying maybe they SHOULD be navel gazing about what they bring that an AI doesn’t. Mosy artist stop being replicate machines once they learn the technical skills and start using then to SAY something.

I didn't say anything about artists being replication machines who don't have distinct symbolism and choices they can explain. My point is that beneath those choices, there's so much more you're taking for granted. Can you name every piece of art that might have had the tiniest subconscious influence on your choices of symbolism, or on developing your understanding of art to think to use symbolism the way you do in the first place?

When I write a scene, my idea of what that scene might consist of is shaped by any number of my previous experiences with media, to teach me about elements a scene can have and how they can impact it. When I write a sentence - even one outside of a story, like this one - I come up with a concept for what the sentence is meant to accomplish, and rely on subconscious parts of my brain to fill in gaps as needed, extrapolating from its existing information to come up with words likely to meet the criteria. That is exactly the same as the process of prompting an AI.

Does your art not SAY something? Are you not DOING something with all those references and skills? Why do you think all art is summed up only by the technical skills used to create it?

In order: of course it does, of course I am, and I don't think any such thing. I'm not sure what prompted any of these questions, but they seem to be a response to a thing I didn't say.

UBI is great, AI is effecting my rent now. I’m not living in a perfected future, I’m living here and now. How does UBI fix the issue happening currently? would YOU like to call my mortgage company and explain I won’t be paying my bills because UBI is the most ethical system? i’ll DM you their number, I’m sure they’ll take philosophical possibilities for my rent payment.

My condolences.

Also, gimme a break about “taking it personal” when you’re talking about my profession AND passion. This isn’t theoretical, you are talking about ME when you talk about artist and AI art. i’m sorry your uncomfortable that you were talking down about a skill and profession and didn’t expect someone from that profession to react. But that’s what happens when you put out negative opinions publicly. The weird “Oh you’re getting too personal~” tactic isn’t going to work cause yeah ofc this is personal. I am very passionate about art and paying my bills.

If this topic stresses you out that much, I would not recommend reading my posts on the matter. Have you considered blacklisting relevant tags?

Everyone uses or is gonna use AI. It’s inevitable. It sucks. You won’t have much of a choice anyway. Much like fast fashion. But just admit you want the pretty pictures and don’t want to pay to commission them and/or work to learn how to make them yourself.

I want to use AI to more conveniently complete projects that I probably could not feasibly bring into reality any other way. I have no problem acknowledging this. But I was advocating for AI art well before I became interested in actually using it myself, not for that reason at all.

@sailor-kaiju if you're that interested in having this argument, fine, let's go.

You dismiss the comic I brought up and its subsequent discussion as meaningless insecurities, but they are nothing of the sort. The artist is absolutely correct - not just about his own art, but about how art works in general. Your art has just as much reason to be considered "stealing" from whatever you take inspiration from, as does my writing. Recognizing that fact is something all artists should do, and I see plenty who do so. Your lack of that self-awareness does not make you any better than those of us who have it.

Meanwhile, I'm surprised you see the idea of UBI as unrealistic Marxism. It's a lofty goal, but trying to put a stop to the use of an effective piece of technology is even less practical. I've been saying for years that it's the real answer to concerns around automation, as have many others - starting long before generative AI got as big as it is now.

If you're not convinced by those arguments, good news - I have plenty more of them! Multiple tags' worth, even. It's a common topic on this blog, one where I've said and shared all sorts of things I don't feel the need to reiterate. I'd expect people who've been following me for a while to be familiar with them by now, unless they're avoiding engaging with the topics entirely.

Whatever is the case, I would recommend against perceiving someone posting things on their own blog as them coming into your house and spitting in your face. Doesn't seem like a healthy perspective.

#gen ai #ai art #sailor-kaiju

24 notes · View notes

actutrends · 5 years ago

Text

How HP is adapting to changing demands of PC content creators

Since Alex Cho took over as president of HP Personal Systems about 18 months ago, HP has been sparring with Lenovo for the title of the world’s No. 1 PC maker. At the moment, the latest numbers at the end of the third quarter of 2019 showed that Lenovo had 24.7% of the PC market, while HP had 22.4% with 14.6 million PCs sold.

But Cho said in an interview with VentureBeat that HP is focused on profitable growth. And he is also focused on how the market is changing and users are making different kinds of demands on their computers. Content creators are growing fast, and they’re the kind of people who invest in heavy-duty PC systems.

These users aren’t going to do their work on a smartphone, and that goes for a lot of people who are part of the smartphone generation, Cho said. That’s good for the PC.

I talked with him about HP’s lineup of new products at CES 2020, the big tech trade show in Las Vegas this week, as well as his thoughts on the future of computing. We also talked about the resurgence of Advanced Micro Devices in the past year, with its Ryzen-based processors that are taking the speed crown away from market leader Intel, which has had a hard time keeping up with demand.

Here’s an edited transcript of our interview.

Above: Alex Cho is president of HP Personal Systems.

Image Credit: HP

VentureBeat: What is new among PC buying habits?

Alex Cho: I wanted to give you a summary of how we see things going forward, which is the context within which you’re starting to see our latest announcements. We’re very energized by what we’re seeing as we look forward. The PC is becoming increasingly relevant, particularly for the next generation of customers.

In the last few years we’ve spent a lot of time studying millennials. We’re studying all segments, but we’re also looking at the next generation, including Gen Z. Their usage on PC, time spent on PC, is growing above millennials. That’s always a good grounding trend. On top of that, what’s relevant from the compute side — this next generation is using the PC for higher engagement, higher-value activities.

We’ve been tracking three main areas. One is around creation, people using their PCs for anything from video to photography, any creative applications, both professionally and also for the non-professional. We’re looking at data around video blogging growing at a significant rate. In China the number of video bloggers already outnumbers the total population of the U.S. There’s a lot happening on the PC around all things creative.

Second is what we call consumption. That might be the world of watching Netflix or Amazon on your PC or compute device, as well as gaming. We talked about gaming last year. Gaming continues to be an ever-expanding PC-based usage activity. Then the third is continuing to grow in collaboration. People are very familiar with using Facetime and doing more on these PC-based devices.

For us, that overall — more eyeballs on PCs, higher engagement area — it just leaves us with a very energized view as we look forward around this entire category. How innovation can really help accelerate and build more value for customers, as well as what it means for us going forward in terms of growth.

VentureBeat: Not so long ago, everyone seemed to be predicting that the smartphone generation would only do things on mobile and wouldn’t use PCs so much. It seems like there’s a bit of a surprise result there. It makes sense that something like streaming video would be one reason. Are you surprised yourselves that the data shows the PC holding up?

Cho: I don’t know about surprised. If you surround yourself — if you look at the progression of the dialogue around the PC, a few years ago people were asking if the PC was dead. We clearly didn’t think so, as the performance of the industry in the past few years has shown. We do a lot of work around insights, following customers, and seeing that there are very unique experiences that people want more of, and that we can innovate for.

It’s less of a surprise, then, but it’s great reinforcement. It helps to substantiate where we’ve been making investments, knowing earlier some of these signs and areas where we believe that computing will add more value. Going forward, we see that compute architectures continue to evolve. It’s going to open up new areas for solutions that will be, in my mind, really breakthroughs.

If you look at our strategy, we divide it into three buckets. One is, we’ll continue to reinvent PC experiences around all of these areas people are spending more time on. Second, it’s around designing for the total experience. If you think about the contributions and the more immersive experiences that we can enable, you start with accessories and displays and broader ambient computing types of opportunities. The ability to deliver a total experience is very attractive. Third, it’s about getting into and continuing to grow services and solutions where all of these new compute models and a lot of data and AI is allowing us to deliver more value to our customers. We’re very bullish on what all of that means for the industry.

To be honest, it’s great to see the response, even in the short term, to the innovations we’ve been publicly releasing, and what we have planned for the next year. We’re super fired up as we go forward.

Above: The HP E24d G4 FHD Advanced Docking Monitor.

Image Credit: HP

VentureBeat: I was curious about where you’ve landed this year on the No. 1 or No. 2 rank for 2019. I know Gartner and IDC always have their own opinions here. But what do you find this year?

Cho: We stay very focused on playing our game. I say that because we might go between number one or number two. But our strategy is around, at least from the HP side, driving profitable growth. We’re looking at, as I mentioned, reinventing PC experiences and delivering more immersive experiences, getting into services and solutions. It’s far less purely unit share dependent.

FY19 is a great example. In a period of very challenging CPU constraints, all of the mid-shift has been very favorable to us in terms of delivering operating profit growth. That’s right on strategy for us. There’s not a unit share goal. But that being the case, we still have a lot of scale, and we continue to stay in leadership.

VentureBeat: How would you characterize the parts of the market that are doing well or growing, whether it’s territories or types of machines?

Cho: That’s exactly where we’re focused. I’ll highlight a few, breaking them up into areas I mentioned where there’s increasing engagement.

Let’s just look at the whole create space. I mentioned the growth of creation on PCs, whether it’s professional people, professional creatives, or other people creating on their PCs. We’re very excited about this. Being able to create, providing a platform that facilitates people expressing themselves in creative ways, it’s such an energizing area of innovation. We’re very focused on that. Sixty-one percent of Gen Zs use their PC to create in some form. You see it in the professional segment, but also in a broad base.

When you look at the types of device solutions out there, you have several of our workstations. You look at our NV line. You look at what we’re doing around our Spectre products, particularly the larger 15″ area we announced. If you look at our devices that are more peak for enabling people to create, whether it’s video or 2D or 3D, those are growing in double digits off a small base. They’re still less than 10% of our mix, and growing double digits. That’s one example.

The second example I mentioned is consume, whether it’s media content or gaming. The x360 form factor is one that continues to be among the most attractive for those who are heavily into media consumption, as well as our gaming products. Both of those segments are growing in double digits. Third, I mentioned collaboration. Collaboration is one that happens in not just official meeting rooms, but in public places, huddle rooms, and so on. Our devices have peak conferencing solutions, as well as Sure View. Our data shows that people who are collaborating in public places a lot, they resonate very much with our Sure View integrated privacy panel. Our Sure View enabled units are growing double digits as well.

Those are some of the areas that are tied to larger trends, where we have some unique differentiation and innovation. We’re continuing to grow quite well. We have actually very balanced growth across all regions around the world.

This is all built around the theme of computing continuing to be more relevant. As that happens, one of the big visions we have is we believe that compute should adapt to people’s needs. No longer do people need to adapt to compute. We believe in adapting computing and how we innovate for people, to give them more freedom in how they compute. That’s a key direction for us.

We’ll be announcing, as you know, a 5G convertible, taking our Dragonfly and giving them all the flexibility of that worldwide convertible, less than 1 kilogram connected, as well as continuing to innovate in our areas of sustainability and enabling these devices to be not only secure, but well-connected and with 90% recycled materials. We also announced a lot of horsepower in the areas of creating content and consuming. Our 15″ Spectre is the most powerful Spectre convertible out there, with the longest battery life. We’re also announcing the world’s first and widest 4K all-in-one with RTX, so that people can really create on these devices in whatever environment. We’re announcing the ability to work from wherever and to quickly connect on our devices through the world’s first docking displays.

Across all of this is the theme of continuing to enable sustainability with our whole series of recycled laptops. As I mentioned, we’re taking the world’s first laptop with ocean-bound plastics and adding even more to that through recycled materials on a broader basis with that product.

The post How HP is adapting to changing demands of PC content creators appeared first on Actu Trends.

0 notes

hotspreadpage · 8 years ago

Text

Will Artificial Intelligence Replace Manual Content Creation?

There are only a few industries in which automation isn’t threatening some job roles. That’s a pretty scary thought, right? Well, don’t panic just yet.

“While automation will eliminate very few occupations entirely in the next decade, it will affect portions of almost all jobs to a greater or lesser degree, depending on the type of work they entail,” according to McKinsey Quarterly.

Roles that require empathy, like therapists and psychologists, as well as jobs that are highly reliant on social and negotiation skills, like managerial positions, are less threatened by automation, according to The Future of Employment: How Susceptible Are Jobs to Computerisation?

Those of us in roles that require creative thinking and original ideas — like content creation — are also deemed at less risk of having our jobs swiped from under our noses by something harder-working, “smarter,” and cheaper to maintain.

For now.

It’s pretty tough to envision a machine generating great content ideas, not to mention creating that content — content worth consuming. Or so you might think.

The reality is that machines are already writing content — and they’re pretty good at it.

In fact, Gartner predicts, “By 2018, 20% of all business content will be authored by machines.”

By 2018, 20% of all business #content will be authored by machines via @Gartner_inc. Click To Tweet

While that’s only a year away, don’t panic — “business content” isn’t quite the same as creative content used for marketing.

Natural language generation

Natural language generation (NLG) is the name given to artificial intelligence capable of producing logical, coherent text.

“Natural language generation is a software process that automatically turns data into human-friendly prose,” as Automated Insights explains.

It’s clever but, unlike a human, NLG can’t produce prose on its own. The format must be templated, and it needs access to a structured data set.

For example, to use NLG tool Wordsmith, you upload your data, write a template and presto — you have content!

Want to see what the results look like? Chances are you already have, although you probably didn’t notice.

Have you ever read Forbes’ earning reports? They are generated using Quill, another NLG platform. Here’s what the content looks like:

“The consensus estimate remains unchanged over the past month, but it has decreased from three months ago when it was 39 cents. For the fiscal year, analysts are expecting earnings of $1.68 per share. Revenue is projected to be 2% above the year-earlier total of $369.4 million at $378.4 million for the quarter. For the year, revenue is projected to roll in at $1.56 billion.”

What do you think?

Sure, it reads fine and it makes sense. If you didn’t know it was written by a machine, you probably wouldn’t notice anything was off. But it lacks something.

Humanity.

The writing has no discernible soul, and why should it? A machine doesn’t.

Machine-generated content has no discernible soul, and why should it, asks @SujanPatel. Click To Tweet

Then again, this is financial content we’re talking about. It doesn’t matter whether the writing has personality. It just needs to accurately report the facts. And for that, NLG is ideal.

Let’s see something else.

Below are the opening sentences to two sports pieces (courtesy of the New York Times). One is written by a human and the other by a machine.

“Things looked bleak for the Angels when they trailed by two runs in the ninth inning, but Los Angeles recovered thanks to a key single from Vladimir Guerrero to pull out a 7-6 victory over the Boston Red Sox at Fenway Park on Sunday.”

“The University of Michigan baseball team used a four-run fifth inning to salvage the final game in its three-game weekend series with Iowa, winning 7-5 on Saturday afternoon (April 24) at the Wilpon Baseball Complex, home of historic Ray Fisher Stadium.”

Can you guess the author for each?

If you couldn’t, you’re not alone. A similar experiment using multiple pieces of text like those above concluded that “readers are not able to discern automated content from content written by a human.” (For the record, the second one was written by a human.)

The study also asked participants to rate each piece of content on 12 characteristics. The results are telling:

Software- and journalist-authored content (also known as machine and human) score pretty equally on factors like coherence and accuracy — characteristics that can easily be learned by a machine (or I assume they can, based on my limited knowledge of programming).

The machine-written content came out on top (noticeably so) for the criteria of trustworthy and informative. That’s fine — those things are important, but they’re not what make content “great.”

The human-written content, however, soared ahead in two critical categories. It was rated significantly less boring and significantly more pleasant to read.

That makes sense.

A computer can’t read the content with a critical eye, and it can’t understand the vital complexities and nuances of language.

But will it be able to one day?

HANDPICKED RELATED CONTENT: Why Automation Is the Future of Content Creation

Turing test

Every year for more than two decades, the artificial intelligence community has congregated for the Turing test — a trial designed to determine whether machines are able to think and talk like humans. It’s named after its creator, Alan Turing — you might know his name from the loosely biographical Oscar-winning film, The Imitation Game.

In 2014, a machine won the Turing Test — reportedly for the first time.

Now, when I initially heard about this, I have to admit I was concerned. If a machine can fool people into thinking they’re conversing with another person, surely it would be capable of creating content that can fool people, too, right? After all, a conversation is unpredictable. A machine that can keep its cover when questioned should produce content using data and a template easily.

Thankfully (for those of us who don’t want to see AI replacing manual content creation, at least) things aren’t quite as they seem. For many years, the Turing test has been regarded as the benchmark for AI intelligence. If a machine can pass the test, it’s deemed to possess at least average human intelligence.

And yet, in the wake of this pass, a number of computer scientists and tech investors questioned the result. Scott Aaronson, a computer scientist and former faculty member at MIT, challenged Eugene (the “winning” machine) to a conversation. Here’s a snippet of what happened:

Anyone with a half-decent grasp of the English language should be able to see that Eugene is far from human. If this is what’s deemed equal to average human intelligence, I think content creators can rest easy.

For now.

Ray Kurzweil, Google’s director of engineering, believes computers will be smarter than humans by 2029. Specifically, he says, they will “be able to understand what we say, learn from experience, make jokes, tell stories, and even flirt.”

Just to clarify, this guy knows his stuff. Not only is he helping to bring natural language understanding to Google, but he has correctly foreseen similar things. In 1990, he predicted that by 1998 a computer would defeat a world-class chess champion. It happened in 1997.

Of course, Kurzweil isn’t talking about content creation specifically, but surely a computer that can comprehend language and learn from experience could create content that stands up to that written by human hands, right?

I honestly think it could — provided it’s given the right data. Based on Kurzweil’s predictions and the quality of content AI already produces, I have little doubt that in the not-so-distant future, computers will be capable of creating some pretty awesome content that’s indistinguishable from human-written content.

What I don’t believe computers will be able to do — at least, not our lifetime — is to think creatively. And that’s key.

Even if computers can create content, they will never be able to think creatively says @SujanPatel. Click To Tweet

The point may come where machines are writing the bulk of business content and news reports, but could a machine write a moving opinion piece or a novel?

AI content creation is, for now, algorithmic. Its capabilities are based on the information we humans provide. This is where I think its limitations lie.

To fully replace manual content creation, AI has to be able to think like a human. It has to be able to feel (to have emotions), it needs to form opinions, and it needs to think critically.

Should that ever happen, I think we’ll have much bigger things to worry about than the demise of manual content creation.

What do you think? Do you believe AI will ever replace truly creative content creators? Let me know in the comments.

Please note: All tools included in our blog posts are suggested by authors, not the CMI editorial team. No one post can provide all relevant tools in the space. Feel free to include additional tools in the comments (from your company or ones that you have used).

Want to explore further the role machines can play in improving your content marketing today and in the future? Don’t miss the Intelligent Content Conference March 28-30 in Las Vegas. Register today and use code BLOG100 to save $100.

The post Will Artificial Intelligence Replace Manual Content Creation? appeared first on Content Marketing Institute.

Will Artificial Intelligence Replace Manual Content Creation? syndicated from http://ift.tt/2maPRjm

0 notes

lucyariablog · 8 years ago