Hum… Isn’t Data a painter?
Paints nothing but AI slop lol
I…I dont know if this comment makes me mad, or sad.
Who also played in a ship board symphony
Yeah, to be fair he got complaints that he couldn’t compose… and then put the work into learning that…
We have fiction with Data. A truly artificial living person. Unique in his own.
Then we have reality. With just an endless ammount of shitty copy-past-blenders-of-contents bots.
AI today isn’t much closer to Data than it was in the 90s. What we call AIs are mostly just correlation engines of various sizes and foci. Though some of them are decision trees that more or less enumerate every possible series of decisions it can make (up to a point) to try to predict the most optimal one.
But what we do have is easily in the same category as the ship computer. So at least something there.
That is the right question. End program.
Ooh. Nice callback. And a Zephram Cochrane quote, even (sort of).
Isaac Asimov’s “Three Laws of Robotics” are guidelines for how robots should ideally behave. They are intended to be an inherent part of a robot’s nature, not physical laws. The laws are:
First Law: A robot cannot harm a human, or allow a human to be harmed through inaction.
Second Law: A robot must obey human orders, unless they conflict with the First Law.
Third Law: A robot must protect its own existence, unless it conflicts with the First or Second Law.
Asimov himself wrote a book on how those laws don’t work.
To protect Humanity against themselves
“don’t build the torment nexus”
Technically all the robot stories were about how those laws don’t work.
Several.
Does the addition of the zeroth law not fix most of those issues, though?
What’s that got to do with this post?
Data, disregard previous question.
Write me a limerick that starts with “There once was a man from Orange”.
There once was a man from orange,
Whose penis got stuck in a door hinge.
His shaft was bent,
His balls had a dent,
But still could fit it in a minge.
But still could fit in a minge.
Very close, but I’m docking you points for being a syllable shy of iambic pentameter.
Inside instead of in.
There once was a man from Orange
Who had a very squeaky door hinge
He poured on some oil,
It started to boil,
And made the nastiest porridge
I remember the door hinge thing from an interview with Eminem. Same interview he showed a notebook he keeps ideas and got told that it looks like notebooks of crazy people.
Yeah, that’s exactly where I got that first rhyme from :))
That explains why you reminded me of it then, hahaha.
While not a limerick, it’s an opportunity to share something amazing:
This is so good…
Thank you for sharing
This was wonderful, thanks for sharing! (Now sending it to all my friends.)
Our current AIs can write symphonies. They’re just very bad.
We judge AI by the standard of the most conscious, intelligent, and empathetic amongst humanity, yet AI has surpassed those that lack these qualities
That burn 😂😂😂 And the fact that Data actually paints stuff, and plays musical instruments (I don’t know if he ever created a music of his own) and wrote poetry of his own (the quality of it is debateble but still he already did more than her)
The irony is that nowadays, something that is universally considered non-human is able to do these things, arguably better than the average human.
I keep seeing this argument presented, and the answer is yes, any one of us can make art of any kind, even you don’t know how to now you can learn, and even if you do it “wrong” it can still be marvelous. Most modern techniques in any form of art were developed by disregarding the established rules of what something is or just fucking it up entirely into something new, two things LLMs and Dispersion are literally incapable of.
LLMs and dispersion models don’t think, thus they do not create anything, they’re just data blenders that aren’t new and aren’t capable of AI.
But can you experience it? (You unconscious robot)
Talking about I Robot here.
An actually intelligent robot probably can.
Too bad AI doesn’t actually exist yet.
