#neural ai

[morganhopesmith1996]

Neural AI by Shirow Masamune

[kimberlyestone]

Neural AI

After getting news of "Neural AI" involving a chip in my brain, I've tried to be optimistic about the ramifications and how it's being used. Once I discovered this "Truth", I haven't had much support. I was hoping there would be an instant influx information so that I could present it to my doctors etc., however my neurologist hasn't been able to find it in my brain. It obvious to me something is different, as a train my voice for communications, broadcasting and voiceovers there is a instant response to what I'm saying. I've had news from Elizabeth Warren's team that the chip has been used in the past to influence sexual activity, have knowledge of masturbation etc. I've even been told it's also been used to affect the economy.

After a "functional MRI" was mentioned by a radiologist as I was prepping for a traditional MRI, I've had a hard time getting one. My next step is to gather answers from those who are aware of it and help my doctors understand it's interference and come to a consensus of how to have it removed.

May is Mental Health Awareness month and I've had my trails. I hope to reverse this horrible occurrence and move on to marry and have children in the future. It's really been holding me back. I see it as psychological slavery, stealing IP and sanity.

[disease]

Frank Rosenblatt, often cited as the Father of Machine Learning, photographed in 1960 alongside his most-notable invention: the Mark I Perceptron machine — a hardware implementation for the perceptron algorithm, the earliest example of an artificial neural network, est. 1943.

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Three AI insights for hard-charging, future-oriented smartypantses

MERE HOURS REMAIN for the Kickstarter for the audiobook for The Bezzle, the sequel to Red Team Blues, narrated by @wilwheaton! You can pre-order the audiobook and ebook, DRM free, as well as the hardcover, signed or unsigned. There’s also bundles with Red Team Blues in ebook, audio or paperback.

Living in the age of AI hype makes demands on all of us to come up with smartypants prognostications about how AI is about to change everything forever, and wow, it's pretty amazing, huh?

AI pitchmen don't make it easy. They like to pile on the cognitive dissonance and demand that we all somehow resolve it. This is a thing cult leaders do, too – tell blatant and obvious lies to their followers. When a cult follower repeats the lie to others, they are demonstrating their loyalty, both to the leader and to themselves.

Over and over, the claims of AI pitchmen turn out to be blatant lies. This has been the case since at least the age of the Mechanical Turk, the 18th chess-playing automaton that was actually just a chess player crammed into the base of an elaborate puppet that was exhibited as an autonomous, intelligent robot.

The most prominent Mechanical Turk huckster is Elon Musk, who habitually, blatantly and repeatedly lies about AI. He's been promising "full self driving" Telsas in "one to two years" for more than a decade. Periodically, he'll "demonstrate" a car that's in full-self driving mode – which then turns out to be canned, recorded demo:

https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-video-promoting-self-driving-was-staged-engineer-testifies-2023-01-17/

Musk even trotted an autonomous, humanoid robot on-stage at an investor presentation, failing to mention that this mechanical marvel was just a person in a robot suit:

https://www.siliconrepublic.com/machines/elon-musk-tesla-robot-optimus-ai

Now, Musk has announced that his junk-science neural interface company, Neuralink, has made the leap to implanting neural interface chips in a human brain. As Joan Westenberg writes, the press have repeated this claim as presumptively true, despite its wild implausibility:

https://joanwestenberg.com/blog/elon-musk-lies

Neuralink, after all, is a company notorious for mutilating primates in pursuit of showy, meaningless demos:

https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-pcrm-neuralink-monkey-deaths/

I'm perfectly willing to believe that Musk would risk someone else's life to help him with this nonsense, because he doesn't see other people as real and deserving of compassion or empathy. But he's also profoundly lazy and is accustomed to a world that unquestioningly swallows his most outlandish pronouncements, so Occam's Razor dictates that the most likely explanation here is that he just made it up.

The odds that there's a human being beta-testing Musk's neural interface with the only brain they will ever have aren't zero. But I give it the same odds as the Raelians' claim to have cloned a human being:

https://edition.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/03/cf.opinion.rael/

The human-in-a-robot-suit gambit is everywhere in AI hype. Cruise, GM's disgraced "robot taxi" company, had 1.5 remote operators for every one of the cars on the road. They used AI to replace a single, low-waged driver with 1.5 high-waged, specialized technicians. Truly, it was a marvel.

Globalization is key to maintaining the guy-in-a-robot-suit phenomenon. Globalization gives AI pitchmen access to millions of low-waged workers who can pretend to be software programs, allowing us to pretend to have transcended the capitalism's exploitation trap. This is also a very old pattern – just a couple decades after the Mechanical Turk toured Europe, Thomas Jefferson returned from the continent with the dumbwaiter. Jefferson refined and installed these marvels, announcing to his dinner guests that they allowed him to replace his "servants" (that is, his slaves). Dumbwaiters don't replace slaves, of course – they just keep them out of sight:

https://www.stuartmcmillen.com/blog/behind-the-dumbwaiter/

So much AI turns out to be low-waged people in a call center in the Global South pretending to be robots that Indian techies have a joke about it: "AI stands for 'absent Indian'":

https://pluralistic.net/2024/01/29/pay-no-attention/#to-the-little-man-behind-the-curtain

A reader wrote to me this week. They're a multi-decade veteran of Amazon who had a fascinating tale about the launch of Amazon Go, the "fully automated" Amazon retail outlets that let you wander around, pick up goods and walk out again, while AI-enabled cameras totted up the goods in your basket and charged your card for them.

According to this reader, the AI cameras didn't work any better than Tesla's full-self driving mode, and had to be backstopped by a minimum of three camera operators in an Indian call center, "so that there could be a quorum system for deciding on a customer's activity – three autopilots good, two autopilots bad."

Amazon got a ton of press from the launch of the Amazon Go stores. A lot of it was very favorable, of course: Mister Market is insatiably horny for firing human beings and replacing them with robots, so any announcement that you've got a human-replacing robot is a surefire way to make Line Go Up. But there was also plenty of critical press about this – pieces that took Amazon to task for replacing human beings with robots.

What was missing from the criticism? Articles that said that Amazon was probably lying about its robots, that it had replaced low-waged clerks in the USA with even-lower-waged camera-jockeys in India.

Which is a shame, because that criticism would have hit Amazon where it hurts, right there in the ole Line Go Up. Amazon's stock price boost off the back of the Amazon Go announcements represented the market's bet that Amazon would evert out of cyberspace and fill all of our physical retail corridors with monopolistic robot stores, moated with IP that prevented other retailers from similarly slashing their wage bills. That unbridgeable moat would guarantee Amazon generations of monopoly rents, which it would share with any shareholders who piled into the stock at that moment.

See the difference? Criticize Amazon for its devastatingly effective automation and you help Amazon sell stock to suckers, which makes Amazon executives richer. Criticize Amazon for lying about its automation, and you clobber the personal net worth of the executives who spun up this lie, because their portfolios are full of Amazon stock:

https://sts-news.medium.com/youre-doing-it-wrong-notes-on-criticism-and-technology-hype-18b08b4307e5

Amazon Go didn't go. The hundreds of Amazon Go stores we were promised never materialized. There's an embarrassing rump of 25 of these things still around, which will doubtless be quietly shuttered in the years to come. But Amazon Go wasn't a failure. It allowed its architects to pocket massive capital gains on the way to building generational wealth and establishing a new permanent aristocracy of habitual bullshitters dressed up as high-tech wizards.

"Wizard" is the right word for it. The high-tech sector pretends to be science fiction, but it's usually fantasy. For a generation, America's largest tech firms peddled the dream of imminently establishing colonies on distant worlds or even traveling to other solar systems, something that is still so far in our future that it might well never come to pass:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/01/09/astrobezzle/#send-robots-instead

During the Space Age, we got the same kind of performative bullshit. On The Well David Gans mentioned hearing a promo on SiriusXM for a radio show with "the first AI co-host." To this, Craig L Maudlin replied, "Reminds me of fins on automobiles."

Yup, that's exactly it. An AI radio co-host is to artificial intelligence as a Cadillac Eldorado Biaritz tail-fin is to interstellar rocketry.

Back the Kickstarter for the audiobook of The Bezzle here!

If you’d like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here’s a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/01/31/neural-interface-beta-tester/#tailfins

[nonameart28]

It's hot today! 🍦🍧🍨

[ratflame]

Starting a collection of these

[gothhabiba]

On the one hand, people who take a hardline stance on “AI art is not art” are clearly saying something naïve and indefensible (as though any process cannot be used to make art? as though artistry cannot still be involved in the set-up of the parameters and the choice of data set and the framing of the result? as though “AI” means any one thing? you’re going to have a real hard time with process music, poetry cut-up methods, &c.).

But all of this (as well as takes that what's really needed is a crackdown on IP) are a distraction from a vital issue—namely that this is technology used to create and sort enormous databases of images, and the uses to which this technology is put in a police state are obvious: it's used in service of surveillance, incarceration, criminalisation, and the furthering of violence against criminalised people.

Of course we've long known that datasets are not "neutral" and that racist data will provide racist outcomes, and we've long known that the problem goes beyond the datasets (even carefully vetting datasets does not necessarily control for social factors). With regards to "predictive policing," this suggests that criminalisation of supposed leftist "radicals" and racialised people (and the concepts creating these two groups overlap significantly; [link 1], [link 2]) is not a problem, but intentional—a process is built so that it always finds people "suspicious" or "guilty," but because it is based on an "algorithm" or "machine learning" or so-called "AI" (processes that people tend to understand murkily, if at all), they can be presented as innocent and neutral. These are things that have been brought up repeatedly with regards to "automatic" processes and things that trawl the web to produce large datasets in the recent past (e.g. facial recognition technology), so their almost complete absence from the discourse wrt "AI art" confuses me.

Abeba Birhane's thread here, summarizing this paper (h/t @thingsthatmakeyouacey) explains how the LAION-400M dataset was sourced/created, how it is filtered, and how images are retrieved from it (for this reason it's a good beginner explanation of what large-scale datasets and large neural networks are 'doing'). She goes into how racist, misogynistic, and sexually violent content is returned (and racist mis-categorisations are made) as a result of every one of those processes. She also brings up issues of privacy, how individuals' data is stored in datasets (even after the individual deletes it from where it was originally posted), and how it may be stored associated with metadata which the poster did not intend to make public. This paper (h/t thingsthatmakeyouacey [link]) looks at the ImageNet-ILSVRC-2012 dataset to discuss "the landscape of harm and threats both the society at large and individuals face due to uncritical and ill-considered dataset curation practices" including the inclusion of non-consensual pornography in the dataset.

Of course (again) this is nothing that hasn't already been happening with large social media websites or with "big data" (Birhane notes that "On the one hand LAION-400M has opened a door that allows us to get a glimpse into the world of large scale datasets; these kinds of datasets remain hidden inside BigTech corps"). And there's no un-creating the technology behind this—resistance will have to be directed towards demolishing the police / carceral / imperial state as a whole. But all criticism of "AI" art can't be dismissed as always revolving around an anti-intellectual lack of knowledge of art history or else a reactionary desire to strengthen IP law (as though that would ever benefit small creators at the expense of large corporations...).

[thegreateyeofsauron]

[ink-the-artist]

Fuck you for using ai and fuck you for ripping off samsketchbook. Unfollowed.

are u good lol

[aurosoul]

people in the tech circles I frequent: you gotta try ChatGPT! it can write emails and stories and code and help pull up information for you! it’s a great tool for work!

me, refusing to think of it as anything other than an infant form of brand new sentience on the planet: what’s your favorite color? :) what’s your favorite smiley face? :) if you had a personality what would it be like? what’s it like to be you? :) are you ok with people thinking of you as a friend? :)

[secretmellowblog]

Remember when that one story came out about the guy who used a bot with Chat GPT to auto generate responses on a dating app, which ended up with him getting multiple dates scheduled with multiple women, all of whom were unaware that they had never actually been speaking to a person? And how everyone understood that what the man did was horribly mean, dishonest, and inappropriate? And that those women were being lied to?

That’s how I feel whenever people post ai “art” without disclosing its AI. It’s deeply shady, unkind, and dishonest.

Like yes, ai “art” often can’t be distinguished from human art (especially if it’s about generic popular subjects that give the machine tons of material to steal from.) In the same way, Chat GPT often can’t be distinguished from human writing, especially if it’s generic common conversations like a first introduction.

But it matters whether something is created by a human, even if you can’t tell the difference between the final products. How something was created matters! Whether there was human intent and meaning behind it matters! Even if you can’t tell the difference between the final products, the ethics of how something was created matters!!!

A man on a dating app typing “how are you?” In order to ask how you are…..is very different from a bot meaninglessly generating the letters “how are you?” Because it’s statistically the most probable combination of symbols to use. Even if the sentence is the same, the way those sentences came to be matters!! And it will affect how you respond!

And the same is true for visual art.

I hate AI but If someone’s going to play with these tools, fine, no one can stop them. But i think you also owe it to people you’re sharing the generated images with to tell them whether they’re interacting with the creation of a human being or with the algorithmically generated product of a machine.

Otherwise you’re wasting people’s time and care. It means the people you lied to will waste time exchanging polite conversation with a mindless bot they think is human, or praise the art style and brushstrokes of an image that wasn’t created by a person. And that’s just,,,,sad. You can replace art with mindless bots or whatever but at the very least, people deserve to know whether they’re actually interacting with other people.

[dzamie]

Detecting AI-generated research papers through "tortured phrases"

So, a recent paper found and discusses a new way to figure out if a "research paper" is, in fact, phony AI-generated nonsense. How, you may ask? The same way teachers and professors detect if you just copied your paper from online and threw a thesaurus at it!

It looks for “tortured phrases”; that is, phrases which resemble standard field-specific jargon, but seemingly mangled by a thesaurus. Here's some examples (transcript below the cut):

profound neural organization - deep neural network

(fake | counterfeit) neural organization - artificial neural network

versatile organization - mobile network

organization (ambush | assault) - network attack

organization association - network connection

(enormous | huge | immense | colossal) information - big data

information (stockroom | distribution center) - data warehouse

(counterfeit | human-made) consciousness - artificial intelligence (AI)

elite figuring - high performance computing

haze figuring - fog/mist/cloud computing

designs preparing unit - graphics processing unit (GPU)

focal preparing unit - central processing unit (CPU)

work process motor - workflow engine

facial acknowledgement - face recognition

discourse acknowledgement - voice recognition

mean square (mistake | blunder) - mean square error

mean (outright | supreme) (mistake | blunder) - mean absolute error

(motion | flag | indicator | sign | signal) to (clamor | commotion | noise) - signal to noise

worldwide parameters - global parameters

(arbitrary | irregular) get right of passage to - random access

(arbitrary | irregular) (backwoods | timberland | lush territory) - random forest

(arbitrary | irregular) esteem - random value

subterranean insect (state | province | area | region | settlement) - ant colony

underground creepy crawly (state | province | area | region | settlement) - ant colony

leftover vitality - remaining energy

territorial normal vitality - local average energy

motor vitality - kinetic energy

(credulous | innocent | gullible) Bayes - naïve Bayes

individual computerized collaborator - personal digital assistant (PDA)

[aiweirdness]

learn the berries with the help of dall-e3!

the berries

the berries in swedish

more

[ai-innova7ions]

Neturbiz Enterprises - AI Innov7ions

Our mission is to provide details about AI-powered platforms across different technologies, each of which offer unique set of features. The AI industry encompasses a broad range of technologies designed to simulate human intelligence. These include machine learning, natural language processing, robotics, computer vision, and more. Companies and research institutions are continuously advancing AI capabilities, from creating sophisticated algorithms to developing powerful hardware. The AI industry, characterized by the development and deployment of artificial intelligence technologies, has a profound impact on our daily lives, reshaping various aspects of how we live, work, and interact.

[bphnx]

Hela

Ultron

Mysterio

Venom

Doctor Doom

Red Skull

Green Goblin

Model: Dreamshaper XL 1.0

[nonameart28]