514
Black Mirror creator unafraid of AI because it’s “boring” (www.avclub.com)
submitted 2 years ago by [M, B] to c/technology@lemmy.world
129 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Black Mirror creator unafraid of AI because it’s “boring”::Charlie Brooker doesn’t think AI is taking his job any time soon because it only produces trash

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

I think the breakthroughs in AI have largely happened now as we're reaching a slowndown and an adoption phase

The research has been stagnating. Video with temporal consistency doesn't want to come, voice is still perceptibly non-human, openai is assembling 5 models in a trenchcoat to make gpt do images and it passing as progress, ...

Companies and people are adopting what is already there for new applications, it's getting more common to see neural network models in lots of solutions where the tech adds good value and is applicable, but the models aren't breaking new grounds like in 2021 anymore

The only new fundamental developments i can recall in the core technology is the push for smaller models trainable on way less data and that can be specialized for certain applications. Far away from the shock we all got when AI suddenly learned to draw a picture from a prompt

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

    The research has been stagnating.

    It utterly baffles me how people can make that claim. AI image generation has exists for not even three years and back than it could do little more than deformed Avocado chairs and shrimp. This stuff has been evolving insanely fast, much quicker than basically any technology before.

    Video with temporal consistency doesn’t want to come

    We have barely even started training AIs on video. So far it has all been static images, of course they aren't learning motions from that and you can't expect temporal consistency when the AI has no concept of time, frames or anything video related. And anyway, the results so far look quite promising already. Generators for 3D models and stuff is in the works as well.

    Far away from the shock we all got when AI suddenly learned to draw a picture from a prompt

    What the heck do you expect? Of course going from nothing to ChatGPT/DALLE2 will be a bigger jump than going to GPT4/DALLE3 (especially considering most people skipped GPT1,2,3 and DALLE1), that doesn't mean both of them aren't substantially better than previous versions. By GPT5/DALLE4 you might really start to worry about if humans will still be necessary at all. We should be happy that we might still have a few more years left before AI renders us all obsolete.

    And of course there is plenty of other research going on in the background for multi-modal models or robots that interact with the real world. Image generations and LLMs are obviously only part of the puzzle, you are not going to get an AGI as long as it is locked in a box and not allowed to interact with the real world. Though at the current pace, I'd also be very careful with letting AI out of its box.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    We should be happy that we might still have a few more years left before AI renders us all obsolete.

    Wow, this is some spectacular hyperbole!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    That's the current pace of AI. It's evolving insane fast and already extremely capable.

    Here is a little game:

    • go to artstation.com
    • pick a random pretty picture
    • recreate it in DALLE3, Bing Image Creator (which gives DALLE3 access for free) or Midjourney


    Example: https://www.artstation.com/artwork/LRmYvl

    Result: https://imgur.com/a/ImbNQDk (about 20 seconds of effort)

    It's ridiculously easy to recreate almost anything on there at a similar or sometimes even better level of quality. Literally seconds to recreate what would take a human hours or even days. What are the chances that humans will still be relevant in this line of work in 5 or 10 years, when we are able to create this level of quality after not even three years of AI image generation?

    And the same will be true for every other job or activity that mainly works on digital data. When you can find enough data to train an AI on, it's gone. Humans are no longer needed. And more general AI model will sooner or later eat up all the rest as well.

    I seriously don't know how one can look at the progress in AI over the last two years and not have a bit of an existential crisis.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    It’s ridiculously easy to recreate almost anything on there at a similar or sometimes even better level of quality

    And ridiculously difficult to copyright any of it because it was generated.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yes, AI doesn't work with copyright.

    And since AI is here to stay, we better replace our failed copyright system with something proper. Disney be damned.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    we better replace our failed copyright system with something proper. Disney be damned.

    I'd like that? But if you're expecting the "we" in here to be the current people in their current power structures I suspect you'll be waiting an awfully long time for that result.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    That doesn't change that the value of human art just went down to zero. Nobody is going to pay hundreds of dollar for something AI can produce in seconds. Furthermore the whole "AI art can't be copyrighted" is just wrong to begin with, any tiny bit of human cleanup automatically makes it copyrightable again and since nobody can tell how the image was created in the first place, you'd be operating in a minefield if you just randomly steal art in the hopse that it was AI generated. Keep in mind that Photoshop already has most of this builtin and it's becoming a normal part of the workflow of editing images.

    And it's all pointless anyway. You have AI, you can recreate anything in seconds. Why even bother stealing anything in the first place? You can just make your own and customize it for the occasion.

    The whole idea of copyright might soon be obsolete, as AI can make you something very similar, yet completely original.

    The interesting question left is: Will static art survive at all? Will the future still have static movies or will everybody just generate their personalized dynamic entertainment on demand?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago*

    The interesting question left is: Will static art survive at all? Will the future still have static movies or will everybody just generate their personalized dynamic entertainment on demand?

    Lol this reminds me of when Kramer from Seinfeld asks if we'll still be using napkins in the year 2000 or if this "mouth vacuum" thing is for real.

    There's already been court cases suggesting that AI art isn't copyrightable.

    The AI art I've seen so far is about as compelling as random crap from deviant art. The only difference being at least the starving artists on there know how many fingers are on a hand.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago

    I want to note that everything you talk about is happening on the scales of months to single years. That's incredibly rapid pace, and also too short of a timeframe to determine true research trends.

    Usually research is considered rapid if there is meaningful progression within a few years, and more realistically about a decade or so. I mean, take something like real time ray tracing, for comparison.

    When I'm talking about the future of AI, I'm thinking like 10-20 years. We simply don't know enough about what is possible to say what will happen by then.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent