Видео

@@rahulbrahma8311 that's going to be a harder one to figure out

@@obsidian1109 you are a rare breed

Depends on how badly you suck at math.

@@MarkEndsley I was able to pass College Algebra, with a looooot of help, and I needed cards written with how to do the process, cause there is so much that I just couldn't remember it. It would be fine if it only requires College Algebra, is that true?

@@GameVerseTraveler my IT degree required up to trigonometry, but I would check at the individual university level.

@@MarkEndsley I checked the classes, and as for Math, it only requires the College Algebra. As for both "Network Systems", and "Information Systems". I just got to choose which one I want lol

@@GameVerseTraveler I wish you luck

Luck!

That's good feedback @benjajaja, thank you!

Heh, fair point, I've judged a group of people with a particular belief while not engaging them directly. I guess I could be close minded in a way as well.

If you have the money I'd say go for it, but it is quite expensive. I wouldn't be doing it if my employer wasn't paying for it. I Love it, but it isn't a smart financial decision for most.

Hi @ambi.music, thank you for sharing your thoughts here! It sounds like you have the view that humans can create work without reference. I understand how this could be true, but I don't see any evidence of this. Humans began creating things in order to interact with the natural world. Theoretically, we could train an AI on only things from the natural world and it could do... something with that. But in our modern day those things wouldn't be very useful or interesting to us as most of them have already been done by humans. Could a human born today raised alone in a cave create something similar Mozart? I certainly cannot prove that they can't, but I have yet to see any evidence that backs this up. All evidence points to humans making things based on what they've been exposed to in their lives, including creative works from others, copyrighted or not. Humans are also repackaging what already exists. Humans aren't even the only species on this earth that creates works of art. Both humans and AI create things from the environment they are exposed to. Both a human and AI could create something new without any external influences (nature only), but it would generally only be of value to those who also live without external influences (nature only), which is nobody today. I also don't think that feeding the AI back it's own output leading to poor results shows much of anything. If you isolate a human with their own thoughts that also leads to poor results. I also disagree that AI cannot do anything novel or new. Without the limitations of physical instruments, AI does things in songs that a human could not do with a physical instrument. This alone shows it is capable of doing new things in the very same way humans do. When it finds a way to remove a limitation, it runs with it. As far as how the future will play out, that may be more important than the actual facts. I think where you and I differ here is that I see resistance to Generative AI art as helping billionaires in tech. They are going to push this technology through with brute force. When artists resist by filing lawsuits, they just set the barrier that high for entry in using these AI tools. In other words, if you don't have the capital to take on artist copyright lawsuits, you can't participate in the AI space. But guess what group of people have that amount of capital. I want to let you know though that I respect your opinion. I realize that there are many that feel that humans are special and we simply cannot be replaced in certain ways. I hope in a way that you are right, but I don't see evidence for that in the scientific world. I do however think if you are correct, AI simply won't be a problem for artists. If the AI can't truly create something new, then it won't, and nobody will bother with AI generated art.

I strongly agree @jayschankman214 , it doesn't make me happy but I think you are correct.

Thanks for the suggestions @monjiaitaly I'm always looking for good brands!

@spark300c that is simply not true. The data is not stored anywhere in the model. What AI does instead is looks, listens and learns, much like people do.

@@MarkEndsley then its scraping off the internet then. which is worst. It use images that not allow to use. In fact people have caught A.I. copying and pasting some else music with right key words. It may learn what people but the no law for human have copy of some thing in their brain. there is law against machines making copies. If A.I was disconnected it require a data base to draw upon. this where concept that generative A.I. maybe break copy right.

It doesn't actually store the data! You could disconnect it from the internet an run it on a local network and it could still work! AI will never copy paste, it can't because it doesn't have the data on hand. It gives you things it thinks you want based on what it has witnessed in the past.

@@MarkEndsley generative AI has been caught copy and paste because people got stills form movies that have been unedited. So basically if ask to give you a picture of bat man it go search the internet and find image of badman and show it to you. IT broke copy right law because it created a new image of copy righted character. offline generative IA has it model data store and limited what can do. So far there is non gerative AI programs that I know of that you can use off line. I use program that use AI but not generative AI. It called synthesizer v and store a voice samples which it use recreate the voice.

I'm honestly not buying this point, that AI is "stealing" by taking others' art by basing the art it generates off of human-authored art. Yes, AI isn't human, but it's identical to the concept of inspiration so...

It can be worth it, but isn't even close to the only option. I would only do it if you can find an affordable way. Masters degrees are expensive. Other options include just doing certifications, or just online learning for what you are thinking about specializing in. If you already have your IT degree, you can probably find employment in Web Dev if you just have the skills. That being said a Masters can help you in the long run, so if you are feeling like jumping now while you're young that could make sense.

@@MarkEndsley Thanks mark

I see what you did there, the opposite of the title!

@@MarkEndsley only little truths are true. With big truths also the opposite is true. Thats life. Always ambivalent.

Hi @bonecircuit9123 this is an interesting concern, what illegal data collection activities are you referring to? If someone did breach someone else's security to obtain this data that would certainly change things. I'm not advocating AI for black hat hacking here.

@@MarkEndsley I posted a comment with the link to the LAION5B dataset and the message might have been muted. To reiterate in case. that data and other datasets were illegally obtained without permission and used as commercial works. If the datasets are vetted it's fine, otherwise it's contentious and liable.

Oh yes! I agree that case literally would be theft! Generative AI itself is not theft, but still can't steal in order to train your model!

@@MarkEndsley The commercial work being used to produce another commercial work is a no brainer and currently under litigation. Additionally you obtain no copyright from producing said works. cite : zara of the dawn copyright

I think this is a point I will bring up in a future video. In this video I mostly ignored the fact that corporations do shady and very illegal things. These AI companies could already be, or turn crooked at some point. Certainly there are some accusing some already. I will go ahead and state now that just because I think AI is creating work the way humans do, that doesn't mean I believe these companies are above the law. I don't want the law changed unfairly to curtail them from their work, but using stolen data could certainly be a big issue with all of this in the future. I'm going to do another video about this in the future, probably soon. Thank you for your insight @bonecircuit9123

Thanks

Thanks @jayhalloween, care to elaborate as to how?

I agree @0MVR_0, many of us that have been on the smaller creator side already feel like Copyright law is completely broken. While the academic model isn't perfect, and probably couldn't be used 1-1, I think it is a good way to start thinking about reforming it.

@@MarkEndsley this may sound simple, yet the process of encoding information disregards the original format. the best that one can do is commit to an ad hoc reinvestigation of plausible citation during decoding.

I feel like today we could come up for a great digital solution for linking the data. If we had an internal database of everything that was copyrighted, we could link things referentially on the internet. ...I mean... we COULD do that, I highly doubt we would.

@@MarkEndsley hardly up to us. Thieves do exist

Can we not apply exactly the same reasoning to humans? Art does not spring forth from nothing, it is based on all of the art that has come before.

I completely agree with @craigmhall, Humans can only really do something they have learned to do from influences outside of themselves.

@opelfrost, I agree, and to take it even further, I do not foresee a world where AI runs everything. With both coding and art (or are they one in the same) managers would have to specify very clearly what they are looking for. This will never happen, therefore AI will never take over :)

Thanks AGI-Bingo, I'm seeing people organizing to spread misinformation out there, so I figure we'd better organize to spread the real information.

​@@MarkEndsleygodspeed I also wish we'd orginize better, we need better coordination. I less worry about the whole artistic aspects, copyrights, and other legal propaganda. Much more interested in the global access to intelligence. We need a decentralized free & open source agi for the people by the people. #WholesomeAGI

I am 100% with you on the @AGI-Bingo. The corporate turn AI has taken has not been for the better. I feel though that it all happens in the same space. Copyright law could be altered to disallow AI works, and that is something I feel I have to fight against. The law should reflect the reality of the technology.

Yo it's Huygens! The video where you showed that how there's no quanta, that a "particle" just an interpolation of all the waves in a normal distribution in region of the spectrum... It's waves all the way down, That was so enlightening ❤

That is another good point rbus. Computers have been mimicking real sounds for a long time, this next step isn't really that new. There are already tons of artists that use a computer as their only instrument.

Samplers get a cut when their music or voice is used in a song, are AI companies planning to give royalties to the actual people who made that stuff, or remove that data set from their models if they ask?

@@SF7PAKISTAN If you can trace a digitally sampled sound to the exact audio source AI learns the characteristics of a sound from a number of recordings and recreates a new original sound with those characteristics. Unless the sound of a saxophone is copyrightable, there is no claim.

@@rbus copyright claims aren't just limited to actual content, they can also be applied to the style and essence of the artwork. If the AI generated material is recognizable in the style of a human artist, then yes there is a case of plagiarism and theft to be made there. And these claims will never go away unless AI can imitate "inspiration" which carries the essence of the work that inspires new art but is distinguishable as not being the original content that is just rehashed

I would disagree with that @SF7PAKISTAN, Generative AIs creation is true inspiration, it just isn't human inspiration. The fact is the part you mentioned about style also gets human artists sometimes, where they thought what the inspiration they had was "unique", but it turns out someone was inspired in that same or similar way and goes after them. I don't know any way as a human artist that I can be sure my inspiration isn't similar to someone elses, and I can't listen to every track ever copyrighted. So with both AI and being a human artist you simply have to take the risk the way the law is written today.

Thanks for your insight! The part about file size is particularly good proof that AI doesn't sample content. I feel like the fact that it could not possibly contain the sample material acts as excellent scientific evidence. And Yeah, I agree it's strange how most don't know most of this was already in the works. I remember talking about AI in College 8 years ago,.

Neural nets have been around for about half a century and one friend got completely obsessed with them in the late 80's and created some gesture recognition software for the 68000 written in assembly. The thing that's remarkable is how very simple the code is to implement them. And now $9 dev boards come with incredibly powerful AI models for image classification, face recognition, license plate detection and pose detection running in trillion ops per second. Just around the corner, Microsoft's amazing 2.3GB Phi3 LLM could be running in a single chip embedded to give devices natural communication abilities.

I figured the work in the 80s is what led to science fiction works referencing neural nets for androids (Thinking of Data of course). At some point this may become ubiquitous, I still worry the cost of training a model may slow things down, but it seems to be getting cheaper and cheaper.

Usually, but it depends on the role. As a developer you can usually work from home if the company supports it.

Thanks Sean!

Bad idea

That can be a pretty good combination

Got it, Team Leader 1. M. Moving out now. Thanks for covering my back.

There are certainly jobs available, and it probably is worth it, but you'll also need to learn marketable skills on your own.

That could be doable with the sys_audit table in a scheduled job. It is an odd requirement but if you did a glideRecord on the sys_audit table for that table, you could pull the last edit and apply it to something.

ruclips.net/video/9Po2SH5PifE/видео.html

@@MarkEndsley thanks for the inputs. I'll try this on my end

Happy to help!