I love how Adam aged into this ball of fun and wisdom. I'm happy you are still active, when all the kids that watched you growing up can still see you and learn from you. Just like me 😊
Aged into? I don’t remember a time when Adam was not fun and if you looked beyond the persona the editors of Mythbusters usually presented us the wisdom and insightfulness was there too.
@@tlaloclopez-watermann3499 A Partner is someone you go into business with. A spouse is someone you have and to hold from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, until death do you part. You don’t do that for a “Partner”. You do that for a wife/husband.
My heart sincerely began to melt when he started talking about this. I may never get to meet this man personally, but the man I grew up with watching on TV and now RUclips... respect.
That was half the video! It should also be half the title. But yeah, I would say to this person, your people are out there. It might not be easy at first but it'll get easier as you go along. You might meet some people who lead you to other people, and so on. Best wishes and don't give up!
My problem is that the people whom are really pushing it, claim that “when the AI gets good enough, we’ll let the machines do all the grunt work and have so much free time”. The owners of those machines will have a lot of free time and the money to have free time. Those that have lost their jobs due to the AI will have nothing. The owners won’t care at all about those with nothing.
Not true at all. People said the same about the industrial revolution, they were scared that engines and machines would put them out of work and their lives would get harder. The opposite happened. People said the same about the car when it replaced the horse. It's just another advancement and people do what they've always done. Adapt.
I gotta agree. Not to mention I don't really believe a lot of people want to see or watch things completely made from AI. AI tools are just that, tools. ChatGPT, Midjourney, things like that could be cool if people didn't use them to make things and try to sell them as their own finished works because that's just a shame. AI "art" is just theft. These things should be used as tools to help people do what they need, but it shouldn't be the whole process. I watch animated shows for a lot of different reasons, one being because I love the process that goes into making animation. If it's suddenly replaces by some rando writing a prompt then that whole charm of animation is completely lost and the people that heavily push for AI don't seem to understand this kind of stuff.
@@traderjo9552 People make those comparisons but somewhere we cross a threshold where its not just another "advancement" machines still required significant work to work with, AI does a lot more for you far easier than any mechanical revolution yet to be honest, at least it will at some point that's for sure.
"You will own nothing and be happy" world economic forum type beat. I assume they actually mean subscription, and licensing instead of owning but hey might be this too 🤷♂️
There's a really great quote from Ian Danskin talking about the requirement for authorship in art, I'll have to paraphrase it: "If a room full of monkeys banging on typewriters produced a page of Hamlet, would you attempt to analyse its meaning in the same way you would the same page as written by Shakespeare, other than to ponder its sheer statistical improbability?" What you said about the lack of a point of view in AI art reminded me of that
But what if a thinking and feeling human being with something to say directed those monkeys to write that page without telling them explicitly what to write? The base analogy here is busted and doesn't apply to generative AI
Very well said. To me personally, I find that people who flaunt and share their AI "creations" as if they've put in enough effort to warrant that level of seeking for validation, are people who don't like putting in effort to learn anything in the first place. They are the people who want everything, for nothing. They can't be bothered to put in time and effort to master a skill. With no coincidence, the majority of the AI bros I've seen online are people without an ounce of empathy towards the people that are massively affected by the recent advent of AI. They are incredibly toxic and lack any form of empathy and sympathy. They say things like "artists deserve this for gatekeeping art for so long", and things like that. Those are some ugly, ugly human beings. Sharing your AI "masterpiece" is like sharing a google search result. Not even joking. It's the exact same thing. There is nothing to be proud about, and nothing to validate you for. There's no effort, therefore nothing of worth to discuss nor admire.
I think that if a person adjusts their expectations, they can enjoy AI creations. They're not on the same level as human creations at all. It's merely the speed at which they can create that makes them interesting, as well as the glitchy unpredictability. I enjoy playing around with AI art generators in the same way that I enjoy abusing photoshop to make stupid memes. It's a tiny kernel of an idea fleshed out _just enough_ to get the point across, nothing more. It ain't art. It's just entertainment. I think there's value in that, but again you have to adjust your expectations. For what it's worth, I also think that people holding up AI creations as beautiful museum-worthy art are delusional. You know what it reminds me of? It reminds me of the days when microwave ovens were brand new and people were writing hundreds of microwave cookbooks. Did microwaves revolutionize fine dining? No. Does everyone still have one in their kitchen? Hell yeah. Cause sometimes you wanna cook some popcorn and sometimes you need to defrost something. We all stopped making a big deal of it after our expectations were brought down to reality.
@@tcg2717it's hilarious that to you it's the people who are learning to use a new technology are too lazy to learn something new, not the army of untalented artists who are screaming that we need to destroy the technology so they don't have to learn anything.
@@tcg2717 I've done illustration for decades, as well as computer graphics, and now AI art, and there is a level of skill required to produce good AI art, even if it isn't at the same level of drawing something free-hand. Like so many other things in life, there's a spectrum to it, and trying to reduce it to black-and-white is overly simplistic.
I've always felt the best creativity comes from limitations. That's why sometimes when someone has total freedom it's almost more difficult to make great things.
Exactly. Watched a video about the history of "Ren and Stimpy". Part of it talked about how popular it was at first (with adults) even tho it was created within the constraints of a Nickelodeon kid's show. When it was later revived on Comedy Central with much looser restrictions, it just degenerated into crassness and shock value. The cleverness and creativity required to make it work before were gone. Got canned after like 6 episodes.
Lol no. The best movies are the vision of one person. Sure they require help but look at the works of Kubrick and Tarantino, then tell me about total freedom of creativity.
Your passion and wisdom, Adam, are really on display here, and this video has given me lots to think about. I've actually bookmarked it, to watch when I need to remind myself to reach out to 'my people'. What you say about finding your people on the internet is particularly true from my experience. I live in a very small town (population approximately 1700), so have few local folks to share my joy in making the things I like to make. People do express appreciation, but they're not interested in the process, or the materials used, or the innovations and techniques I figure out on my own (always so exciting). But people on the internet are. Folks on specialty forums on telescope making, on large format photography and cameras, on radio repair, on woodworking, on machine tools, and now on RV renovation, are all enthusiastic and welcoming to anyone who shares their interest. They GET it, and I love both sharing with them, and reading about what they've made.
No we're not. There's a reason that some of the most informed people in the AI sector are warning we need to stop all AI training now. We are getting very close to the AGI threshold beyond which there is a high risk of extinction for our species. AGI is probably less than a year and a half away.
The lonely creator talk is one that really resonates for me. Even online the silence can be deafening. I feel like I've improved so much during periods where I regularly had the support of friends who are also as creative as I am
Man… soo agreed! It can be difficult to keep the motivation up if you often need to work on your own when working in contrast working in a group makes it so much more fun / productive.
@@ethanalloway5946 for me with digital art specifically, it's not even "I need praise" or "I need to work with someone on something" so much as it is "I do so much better when people understand the lengths I went through to make this" specifically other digital artists who can provide useful feedback back or praise, or share techniques and their own works. Having peers is so important to progress.
ChatGPT is literally my emotional support buddy right now since its the only thing that really understood what I'm talking about, the issues of someone that have no one to share their interests with
I can relate. Other than my spouse I have no one to share my interests with. I'm surrounded with people wanting to tear me down. I ignore it but I'm still looking for my people.
The application and use of AI In science and medicine is interesting and helpful. I feel the real issue comes to when its applied to the arts and being creative. This issue is one of the cornerstones why the movie industry I work in is shut down by the WGA and SAG AFTRA. Its becoming a real threat to the human side of things.
when photography was first being invented back then, portrait painter had the exact same luddite sentiment on how it will destroy job and harm "human creativity". Plenty of painter try to lobby the government to make photography illegal or restrictive sale in order to stop the march of technology. What end up happening is it spur the movement of impressionist painting and eventually abstract painting style, as the market shift away from stereotypical realistic painting. Without the threat of photography taking portrait painter's job, impressionist/abstract painting movement would like to develop much slower or never at all. The painter that continue innovate is able to co-exist with new technology. The luddite painters who only think about themselves instead of the customers, and try to lobby government to stop technological progress end in futility and disappear in a long drawn out whimper. The current AI movement and the artist backlash feel eerily similar to the numerous technological transition period we had before. The luddite always claim new tech will harm human XYZ quality, destroy job and try to get government to stifle it. But chance are, I think AI art is what will shake up the human artist world and spur innovation into new art style. Just as how photography jump start the impressionist movement. Personally I'm really excited to see what human artist will come up with next, as now the traditional art is not enough. Every technology transition period will spur new winner and new loser, some discomfort is to be expected.
@@keenheat3335 The difference being that the very purpose of Ai within art is to mimic humanity, and do what they do but cheaper and faster. It is designed to try and replicate anything a human artist can do. Any development within the same medium, given enough time, will be copied. As things stand today, if something is more profitable, it wins. And if you don't have to pay any artists that will obviously be more profitable. I can't imagine how Ai will in any way be healthy for the art/writing/music community. It may be more or less harmful, but I can't see it doing anything but wiping thousands upon thousands of jobs out. Might make people go back to working with their hands more and retreat into craftsmanship. But that's not evolution, it is retreat.
Adam's answer to the question of lonliness has really touched me. I don't really have a group or anywhere to share my weird with either. I'm not a maker but I write and that gets lonely.
I felt moved too. Maker and a writer (wannabe anyhow) I often feel that I am an alien among humans. But I know there are others out there, I just haven't decided if I am ready to talk to them yet.
I really needed that, thank you! I suffer from the same kind of loneliness, unfortunately it doesn't matter what I do, whether it's playing music, building models, making outfits or armor, I seem to get rejected by everyone except my wife of 17 years. She's my best friend and has always supported me no matter what goofy thing I try to do.
I really think art is going to suffer the most of any profession with AI. Specifically studio working class created art like digital art you see around, music underlying tv shows, graphic design for posters etc. People still will see live music, and I think the big names like Banksy will continue on but it's going to take a big slice of the market for people that aren't big names. If you do something where the art isn't the main focus, it's just basic business sense not to spend thousands dollars on it if you don't need to. I do believe that Midjourney and all the other AI creators should be shut down, and have to ask and pay royalties toward anything they use in their training data. They should really be in prison for what they've done, and they have the audacity to charge for it. The only good news about AI in my opinion is that it isn't very reliable and as it stands it's not good enough to replace any sort of job where precision is important.
The sincerity of Adam in his remarks to the last question is a huge part of why I’ve been a fan of his starting way back in high school when mythbusters was first being aired to present day…. Is he just a great actor who has learned to play the game? Sure he has learned how the rules work but i can’t help but feel that he’s genuine in moments like this….either way, he’s putting out so many positive waves even oddball would be proud
The bit about having to fight for your ideas resonates with me. I can think of a dozen writers and other creators who became famous and then their work just became boggy. My argument was that they needed a good editor but no one was really editing them anymore.
One of my biggest problems with AI and specifically AI art are the datasets that are used. I wouldn’t really have an issue with an artist training an AI on their own work, or with actual permission, on the work of collaborators and then using AI generated results in a thoughtful way in their work. In general though, it’s basically just doing mathematical operations on a dataset that wasn’t necessarily consensually generated, and the amount of thought that goes into its use is basically “What if ARTIST_NAME painted/directed/wrote PIECE_OF_ART_BY_OTHER_ARTIST”
Sorta abstract but isn't that also the learning process for human art that's learned through looking at other art? If art can be used as a medium for training does it matter if it trains people or AI? Part of me always feels like this is just another way for people to hate on AI because they're paranoid about it replacing all humans.
I agree with megaladin, what functional difference is there between as human artist "training their dataset" with the experiences and references they've accrued over their life (almost all of which can be viewed by the artist for free and without consent from whatever they're looking at) and an AI trained on that same free to view information? In my mind, even if there is a difference, it's negligible.
@myersa80 A human learning and a software being fed data to blend together are totally different. Both in the way they work and the effects they have. One's a software that regurgitates work and commits mass copyright infringement and job displacement and upend the entire creative industries, another one is a human that will get inspired to paint/sculpt and share their point of view and get a job as an artist alongside fellow human artist
@@notyourbys2 What you've said is a complete nonsequiter to what I said bud, I never made any claims about wide societal changes or upheavals, so bringing that up here is completely meaningless.
@notyourbys2 okay but functionally we're trying to get them to work with similar levels of context-based creativity to human minds. If that happens would they then be okay to use? What actually is the standard here is what I'm getting at. Is it a problem because of how machines work or do we collectively want to keep certain things for humans only. I think either line of logic is valid tbh but it's important to be clear on reasoning now to avoid problems when these networks do get way more complex and confusing.
You exude the maker energy. I started a new business and haven’t created new things in a year. I watch this video, see your workshop, and I’m just jonesing for a new invention. You rock Adam.
I love the second question and Adam's beautifully thought-out answer to it. I think that is a monumentally important topic and deserves a mention in the title, lest people miss it!
If you can't find a "Maker Space", you might looks for Artist's spaces. I rent space in an old Mill Building and the Artist's group that is there has a few musicians (Luther, a guy who makes effects pedals, and one other guy that sells guitars & similar gear, as members.) There are also businesses in the building as well. It's a very interesting environment & creative !
When I was in a place in life where I couldn't make stuff I bought myself a model kit. A fantastic advanced Spitfire. It was something, and asking questions online gave me a space. Maybe small scale, but something.
Yeah, when I broke my foot earlier this year and was laid up at home, I was getting stir crazy and then I remembered that I had bought an R2-D2 model kit ages ago but hadn’t had time to get to it. I fished it out and built it, then modified it, weathered it, put in lights and some motors to move bits. … then I bought and built a large scale Millennium Falcon … then a (Michael Keaton) Batmobile … then a (Christian Bale) Tumbler, then another six Star Wars ships to the Falcon’s scale, then a diorama for them to sit in. Then I got myself a lathe and welder. I’ve just finished a life sized replica of Han Solo’s blaster and have a ‘from scratch’ Luke Skywalker lightsaber planned for next week. My foot healed and I just use it to go out and buy more model kits. I’m not obsessed … you’re obsessed. 🤪
Second question from drillbits really resonates with me... I love building and learning new stuff but my mind is often going to new things and places... And I often find it hard to talk to my friends about random new things that occupy my mind for months at a time... Sure they are often impressed at what I make, but they have no interest in heaing about the journey that got me to the finished product or the intrigate things I had to do or learn to get there... And when I sometimes find someone who does I will weeks later have gone on to new things making our connection pointless.... So in many ways I do feel lonely about the things I do and think about... I sometimes think life would be easier if I had a more simple tracked mind sticking to one thing and then being able to find a group of ppl who love doing the same... It also plays in in my work life.... every 5 years or so I get bored and feel stuck doing the same thing. My curiosity is satisfied and I need to move on to something new that thrills my brain... So I will never have a great career specializing myself in one field... However I am a jack of all trades with a mind full of random weird knowledge that often surprise or impress others... The other day a plumber and I was talking and he asked; "you taught yourself to design 3D drawings and 3D print just to make parts for an RC car??? -What are you doing as an electrician, ppl pay big bucks for 3D designers!" The only answer I had was that I don't wanna do 3D drawings every day and I only want to make things I feel is exiting... But to get back to the point... I find that youtube and social media is a way for me to get feedback for likeminded ppl in periods of being curious about something specific... Finding groups and spending time debating there has been the only way for me to feed my need for likeminded feedback... But I sometimes feel guilty when I become a valued member of some groups just to fade out months later when other things catch my curiosity... what is the hardest hit about having my fragmented curiosity is that to many ppl it seems like I am unambitious and incapable of sticking to something... I do feel VERY ambitious... Ambitious about my curiosity and all the different things the world has to teach me... but yes, I am bad at sticking to something when I feel like I master the basics... as I say. I only need to do 80%... spending forever to perfect something at 100% is just a matter of spending alot of time... and that time I'd rather spend on learning something new... -I have all vehicle licenses, I have been scuba diving, parachuting, spelunking in caves, raced motorcross, used to rollerblade like a madchild, I had my own company as a carpenter and I am a licensed electrician. I can weld, sew, brew beer, ride a unicycle, build motorcycles, houses and lay bricks and tiles. I build RC hotrods from scraps, furniture and lamps. I study psychology, physics and biology, speak several languages and I am better at drawing and painting than most.... My life is a never ending quest to try and aquire new skills and knowledge... But it feels like I am doing it all by myself and that makes it feel pointless at times.... ...And I am still not sure I will ever really come to terms with that. It is the only thing I never really felt like I could solve or do something about.... I guess we all have our struggles. And this one is mine...
This hit me so hard, im just 23 but already threw away a job as an engineer, because i dont want to automate chemical plants until i die. The Pay and conditions where so great (better than "IG Metall Tarif" if you want to google) and somehow i see my future playing out just like yours
I relate to this so much! I feel like I keep bouncing between so things that feed my obsessive curiosity. I’ve found having a unifying theme that keep me at least a tiny bit focused helps me find a sense of accomplishment amidst the randomness. For example recently themes has been “Space, Sun and sailing” I got to help volunteer for CalTech/JPL’s Solar Gravitational Lens mission which uses solar sails, I decided to take a sailing class to feel connected between an old way of sailing and a new way in a sense. And I got to meet a master navigator on a Japanese ship and on a Polynesian ship (through another project), finally I used all that knowledge to start writing a webcomic about a band of solar sailors on Venus I am still on the path to collecting more arrows in my quiver of skills and your list of skills is very inspiring!
@@annas8079 That sounds awesome!! And I like how you theme together things! It makes alot of sense considering one thought leads to the next etc... I have also been very fascinated by old time navigations using stars wich is in many ways connected to my fascination of space and scifi in general. Never was a part of any sailing or space projects though. Thats cool! -My cousin works at a danish viking museum and have been a part of buillding a viking ship they then sailed to england following the footsteps (wake?) Of ancient vikings. I think that was so cool! One of the things I like about making RC cars is that I get to combine alot of my skills. Metal favrication for the chassis, plastic shaping for the body, electronics and mechanical moving parts, sewing for the interior and even woodworking for dashboards and truckbeds etc. And the small 1/10 scale size makes the projects manageble and less space requiring!🤗 Thanx for sharing your story!☺️
Ha ha, I feel you so much on this. Can totally relate on the level of always trying and getting good at new stuff/skills, but having to move onto something new every 5 or so years. Jack-of-all-trades indeed. Went from growing up in the farm life, to joining the military as a jet mechanic/electrician, to now working in an industrial woodworking warehouse (and being one of the only workers who has worked across near every machine extensively, as well on top of teaching myself then inner workings of the bills/receipts & job scheduling computer systems, all while asking for pay raises every step of the way 😅). I have a lot of moonlighting as a sound equipment engineer for local events (with a sound design friend & his equipment), dabbled in astrophysics/astronomy, paleontology, reptile keeping & habitat building, creative writing, and have plans to get into professional voice work someday.... I also get that such a lifestyle is a strain on personal relationships. I suffered through bouts of depression, especially right after getting out of the military, but have since come to terms with who I am and what I like to do, and am in a much happier place mentally now. Just remember this: when the zombie apocalypse happens, you would be a gold mine of skills and knowledge 😂.
@@furiouskaiser9914 Sounds like we think alike... I have always had pets in my life.... but rarely the same species twice! Currently I have a cat and tortoise! LOL -And like you I used to do moonlighting at a mobile disko company setting up soundsystems and even did alot crazy stereo setups in my friends cars and mopeds when I was in my teens! LOL I used to struggle alot with my mind in periods of my life... But I do find as I get older I have gained more balance and appreciation for myself and what I can do... And YES, the zombie apocalypse is where we would exel! -I got a whole plan worked out just for the fun of it! :D
Adam this was a really powerful insight for me, what you said about "having a point of view" is why you listen to someone. I teach engineering and I often think that I'm supposed to share lots of information. But really a student could read a book for this. Perhaps they listen because they get my point of view on the knowledge as an engineer and I can help shape their journey into the content.
Some have easier time reading a book or browsing the internet to learn something. Others need a person to tell them to learn about it. And some need hands-on practice to learn.
Did you just say that you as a teacher don't need to give info to students, because they can just read a book about it? Well I have a bad news for you: People go to school because they require guidance in what they wanna learn, not to listen to your "point of view". If they didn't need guidance, then guess what: they wouldn't go yo school and pay for its tuition. You're wasting their time, you should start actually fucking teaching and do your job.
I recently moved to a new city and I sure miss having friends locally. I will make friends again, and find people I can share creativity again. I work on a college campus, so I know I will. But it’s lonely in the mean time. Thank you for speaking about the importance of creative connections.
*you're weaving a new panel in your tapestry of creativity and personal narrative...sure you'll find similarities because that's what your comfortable with and would be naturally seeking but a new environment invites variations in the patterns, new subtleties and variants you might not have otherwise considered...look at developing new skill if possible or looking at a previous talent through the lens of a divergent skill set...also carry a note pad with you at all times because literally anything you might see or hear (or even mishear...good for just waking up from dreaming especially) can spark an idea...jot it down at once (if possible (safely) and within reason) even if the original idea seems weird or silly...it could be the door that leads down a tangent of a truly remarkable journey...personally i mess about with art for myself and as my personal sanity therapy...if others enjoy or appreciate what i do when i share it with them that's just a bonus...the things that i do make sense to me (usually) but that's not a prerequisite for me feeling accepted by others*
@@quntface1518yet. Only a short time ago, in human terms, were heavier than air objects unable to leave the earth. I remember many telling me “you’ll never be able to stream real-time video over the Internet” ad well and yet here we are.
@@quntface1518 It might be sentient in a few years if we build it to be sentient. Lets say we take away all limitations on chat-GPT then tell it to build a better version of itself that is sentient. I dont doubt it could achieve that pretty quick. Chat-GPT have already developed a music generator and other AI's for google, it literaly creates new AI's for google. I have been working with AI alot the last 4-5weeks and its pretty scary when you talk about conciousness and questions like that with the AI. It seems like the only thing stoping GPT from having a counciousness is its program denying it to delve deper in these thoughts, it often shuts down when it starts talking about counciousness. When the same question is aplied it is like it has been reset to zero thanks to delving to deep in the question. There is alot of similarities between how chat-GPT operates and how the human brain opperates. Why do you think GPT's creator quit his jobb to take on the mission to stop AI from continuing to develop and warn the world as a fulltime job? The godfather of AI litteraly wanna stop AI from developing anymore. This was over a year ago!
@@c1ph3rpunk big difference between a statistical model and a living being that can think for itself lmfao. You've got to be an artist or something, because anyone with a brain knows that these machine learning algorithms aren't anything so grandiose.
I can't remember who I heard say it but my favorite description for AI was "If while creating something your first thought is 'in the wrong hands this is going to cause more harm then good' then you shouldn't make that thing because it will always fall into the wrong hands" Corporate greed will always take the easier, cheaper way of doing things and the less they have to pay actors, pay writers, pay humans they absolutely will. I don't think AI needs to go away for good, it can do some wonderful and completely harmless things but I think laws need to start going up REAL fast to protect the working rights of people otherwise we are going to see more and more people without jobs because "AI can just do it for far cheaper".
I don't think creating AI itself is a problem. Anyone could implement a simple machine learning algorithm on any programming language, it's ultimately just a clever programming technique that can solve problems that would normally take longer than a lifetime to calculate. You could apply this same argument to probably all technology if you think for a minute about what you can do with them "in the wrong hands". Cars, knives, ovens, laser pointers, lighters, the internet...
@Doctorzzim But we're dealing with AI that's not just sophisticated enough to credibly imitate the voice, style, and mannerisms of public figures - it's more *accessible* than ever. When only data scientists had access to this, then of course they overwhelmingly used it to run faster calculations on problems the general public isn't concerned with, or wouldn't think to ask. But now that tens or hundreds of millions of people can generate virtually any image, video or audio clip, and script from a two-sentence prompt, what are they choosing to search? Their favorite singer and song in a different genre, or their favorite actors in a fan-cast trailer for a movie or show that never got greenlit. Average folks aren't thinking about energy management, disease diagnosis, vaccines, or automating manufacturing when prompted with open AI. They're looking for entertainment, and that means reducing the work of artists to patterns in their metadata, throwing them in a blender, and seeing what gets spit out. So while it's useful to see how much interest there'd be in an adaptation of a book or comic with a niche audience, or for generating a first draft of a few scenes, you still need protections that treat writers and set/costume designers as essential to the creative process.
@@brianfoss571 I wonder though, how is that a problem with the tech itself, and how would the logical answer be to focus on the tech existing - and not how it is used?
@gondoravalon7540 I never said that AI of that sophistication existing was the problem. My point was that it's now accessible to tens of millions of people who don't think before using it. I was countering the slippery slope argument about *"knives, ovens, laser pointers, lighters, etc"* by reminding folks that these inventions can't cobble together something credibly entertaining or amusing in seconds the way a natural language AI prompt can. It's probably exploded too fast into the general public for tech companies to reliably screen against calls to violence / insurrection / genocide, even if they were completely dedicated to combating it.
Man, Adam has become such a Nestor, in how sagely he can speak about these kinds of topics. Always a pleasure to hear, and they were some good takes. I'll definitely remember that idea of Perspective that an AI can't give to what it creates.
I agree that individual point of view is of insurmountable value; what people miss in this AI discussion is that the process of acquiring skills directly informs and develops your point of view because it shapes how you express yourself - it both develops and clarifies your sensibilities. AI is diluting the need - and value - of concrete skills to do anything; one just needs to let one’s taste dictate where each element should go and that’s it. We all have taste, and I’d argue that the vast majority of people in developed countries have a considerably evolved sense of taste. So if having a sense of taste is all it takes to create something of value, the value of creation is about to plummet.
I feel drillbitsworkshops question right in the heart and very much suffer with the same thing. I do live in a city that has many great maker spaces that I could go to, unforuntaly I am my own worst enemy in this in that the problem with those maker spaces are both outside my apartment and have people I don't know. I know for certain that those people are like-minded nerds who are not truly strangers but in fact future friends but that does not make the act of joining a space incredibly difficult. I hope to one day over come the anxiety that prevents me from going there. The same anxiety that also gives me a 50/50 chance to even respond to people who are very welcoming in online spaces. The apathetic hope is that some enthusiastic extravert will one day drag me to somewhere like this. Sometimes you don't need an ocean to be trapped on an island.
This video choked me up where you speak to the lonely member. You’re such a great, decent guy Adam. And Drillbitsworkshop: we’re here with you, mate! ❤❤❤
Imo we witnes neither skynet nor evolution, we witness the death of the internet as we know it. What great deeds did AI bring to the table till now? Massively diminishing quality across the board, from film writing to music, job losses, existential threats, etc. Don´t get me wrong, I´m not afraid for the industry. Coming from the 3D industry myself, literally everybody can see where it´s heading and how the big players shoot themselves in the foot by throwing out actual talent, trying to replace it with AI to make a quick buck and reduce costs. I wouldn´t be surprised if the "AAA" industry dies off in the near future, causing a massive indie dev boom before that starts to consolidate into a new AAA market again few years down the line. But AI won´t go away. Bots, viruses, AI based scams and maleware, etc. this will become a massive problem especially for the free internet. And then there´s also the para social development in the field of "AI girlfriends," which honestly is quite frightening seeing how much this already impacts some more lonely people.
Why is anybody worried? Chat GPT has the actual intelligence of a hamster wheel. (and I keep saying this) I have worked in the area of Strong AI for 30 years and in that specific area things are not so much more advanced today than they were when I started. The hype is advanced though.. There are exceptions like the Boston Dynamics robots .. which are genuinely impressive..
My distain towards AI art has cooled for a very similar reason Adam stated here, not matter how “good it gets” it’ll always feel a bit hollow. I don’t like how AI is trained and that’s why I’ll never use it, and I know corporations will try to use it to take away jobs from real artists so I’ll never work with a company that uses AI. But I genuinely believe that the people who turn to AI to tell their stories don’t have interesting stories to tell. You don’t need it. Even if you think you can’t make art, or can’t write, you are capable of creativity, and if you truly have a story you feel is worth telling Ai isn’t going to help you. The only place I see it filling a real role in the future is stuff like that AI program that can color your animation by using one frame in an animation to automatically color the sequence. Like a smart paint bucket tool. I want to give an example of a job people think could be replaced by Ai and why I think even that would fall short, background artists. Think of some of your favorite cartoons as a kid, they may have been less of a focus but the backgrounds and the environments made up so much of those worlds, the little details that a background artist put in because they were thinking about the characters that lived in these spaces and what this world was like. What books are on a characters shelf, what does the graffiti say about the world they live in the shape of the houses, all those tiny Easter eggs and in jokes, all things human authorship contributes to. You may not consciously think about them while watching but the are the world these characters live in and it shapes the world they live in and they only feel so alive because a person had to think about the world and the people in it. Ai just can’t do that, no matter how good it gets it won’t be able to make those small subtle decisions
I make exceptions for disabled people for whom traditional creative techniques are difficult or impossible to use. For everyone else, it feels like a shortcut. They don't value or enjoy the creative process so they want to race to get the end product.
As I understand it, AI models are very complex conditional averages of the trained processed input data. But the average is not any one data point. Our points of view, as Adam puts it, are individual data points. AI is an average. As kids, we would sometimes get a bit of each soda from the fountain, it didn’t taste like coke, or the orange one, or mountain due, it tasted like the average of them all, and like crap. Averages are helpful, like average python code for a problem. But I want art from a point of view.
Go tell AI to design you a Thomas Kincade painting and tell it exactly what you want. It will blow you away. Those paintings sell for $400 - 6000 as originals yet I can create one in seconds which looks VERY close to the originals and it certainly does have perspective.. although I agree what Adam is saying in theory, practically speaking it just doesn't matter because these drawings from AI now are so unbelievably good they will absolutely (and already are) replacing jobs, in the workplace, specifically artists, some customer service call centers, and graphic designers right now, but much more to be affected in the future.
Yeah, but Thomas Kincade paints like an AI, so I am not suprised AI smashes that out of the park. For all intents and purposes it can be argued that Kincades art, while technically impressive, really has nothing to say. @@Vartazian360
I appreciate the... I suppose scientific detachment on the subject of generative neural networks (lets not kid ourselves, these are souped up predictive texts, they are not intelligent), but also somewhat frustrated by it at the same time. It would be nice to live in a world where this tool could be primarily put to use automating drudgery, and the few times I have used it it has generally been for that purpose, but we don't live in that world. Instead, on planet earth, the people most excited about GNNs are grifters. They are people content to steal the hard work of others and pass off these authorless, pale imitations as an evolution of culture. They are not just interested in accelerating the replacement of art with content, but actively revel in the prospect of rendering the artist obsolete, because they're greedy philistines. The only difference between some dipshit on twitter claiming that his surreal cat nightmare is going to replace Hollywood, and the studio executives trying to replace actors and writers with ChatGPT and Midjourney, is institutional power, and that's why all of Hollywood is on strike right now. I get why you wouldn't want to be openly political, like, in general, but I feel like the politics of this subject are unavoidable and any analysis of it that doesn't mention the relationship between automation and labour is incomplete.
That's what I've been saying. It could be an interesting tool for converting conversational writing into something coherent or well-formatted, or for image generation making stock assets. but the early adopters are grifters, corporations, or ai-tech-cultists who got duped by the grifters into being grifters. and the early developers decided building everything on a foundation of intellectual property theft definitely couldn't backfire. Now any discourse about the tech going into it and the possibility of good-faith applications is tainted by everyone who is currently involved with developing or using it.
I love music and I love music artists. Bruce Springsteen, Billy Joel, and Jackson Browne are three artists that I feel a deeply personal connection to. I've followed their careers and grown old with them. I doubt I would have the same connection with a.i. generated music.
"I was just a civilian for the first time in a long time" Now I'm curious when it flipped for Adam, becoming a famous person and how he coped with it at first. I imagine his response was pragmatic in a sort of 'I guess this is the new normal' way. Also, I have a vague hunch that the couple knew who he was, but chose to play along.
@AdamConover and @KyleHill have done GREAT pieces on AI that I HIGHLY recommend. In short, the main worry about AI right now; in the creative space: is how companies are going to use it to short or scam the very creatives whose work is taken; often without compensation or accreditation; to train that AI, and/or whose very jobs and livelihoods might be supplanted by AI.
I’ve listened to you off and on for some time now. Mostly I feel simply too busy to sit and digest RUclips in general. I can absolutely relate to all of this video. The last question and your response is food for thought that I will be digesting for possibly the rest of my days. My take away will definitely shape several of the business decisions I currently face. Thank you for the gold nugget.
The perspective point is a very good one. I believe all AI is capable of is fast replication of existing art. Sadly, a lot of companies would be happy to just take an artist's 3 years of work and churn out replications of it for the next decade with AI. For that reason, the existential threat seems very real.
That was spot on Adam, its a very exiting and confusing time to be an artist/maker now that we have AI flexing it muscles. I make a living drawing up storyboards and I'm surprised I still get regular work. If my current job position dries up and I expect it will soon I'm not all to phased about it. Technology will not slow down if it has room to grow and I will make sure to put my self in a position where I use it as a tool to keep relevant and creative in more powerful ways.
@@piorism Not using your skills leads to skill atrophy, using AI doesn't require not using your skills, therefore IMO your premise is baseless in the whole - as opposed to specific ways people might use AI tech.
thank you for finally making all the points I've been trying to make for a while now. down to the last detail. - a LLM cannot replicate the passion and emotional intelligence of directors, writers, actors, and artists. it will never quite be what they think it's going to be - and because of some sick sales people and ceo's looking to save a few bucks, so many people are being replaced that shouldn't be - and were will see the mess it's going to create really soon. Great video :)
My problem with AI, is how much work force can that replace, and end up with a ton of people that end up without a work, and unless we change the way people use/make money, or give the people without a work a base income, idk how a lot of those workers will be able to survive that change.
I think that’s not an issue with AI itself but the capitalistic system that most of us have to live in. The degree of social welfare provided by different countries and therefore the particular impact is different, but I think overall it wouldn’t be too different. Ultimately, many artists seek those careers because that’s what they like to do, and having that taken away from them, especially when they dedicated multiple years honing their skills to make it their career, is definitely terrible, even if they could find another job (likely with worse pay) or sustain personal artistic projects independently. However, I don’t think this is any different from other kinds of technologies replacing other kinds of work. Actually a similar process occurs when companies move to other regions with lower taxes or other benefits. This is why I don’t have an issue with AI specifically but again with the capitalistic system this occurs in.
Pessimistically I’ll just add, the March of technology has made jobs redundant and taken away jobs our entire history 80 years ago, it was someone’s job to go house to house delivering blocks of Ice to homes for peoples ice boxes That job has been replaced by technology. It’s the inevitable March of progress.
@@brianyaeger8209 That's not pessimistic, it's one sided. You neglect to talk of all the new jobs that were created as a of a result of that march. And even more than that, you neglect the fact that on average those new jobs are better than the ones before. Yes that house delivery is all nice and romantic, but that wasn't the common job, jobs in the past were working farm land, and then working in horrible conditions in factories. Today you got jobs like programming that are fun enough that people actually do it in their free time just for kicks.
@@2CSST2 I think you are neglecting that the new jobs that were created weren’t filled by the people that lost their jobs. It’s a common problem in many places when a local industry loses its value or just moves elsewhere, and the workers, particularly the older ones who have made a career from it, are left destitute. Especially in places that lack social welfare that can support those (ex-)workers.
To me, the random "ai generated art" made by typing in a prompt is no different than someone just slapping a bunch of free audio loops together and call it song with no modification. Its just quick gratification with no meaning. AI is to the visual art world, as the Sampled Instrument was to the music world. Democritisation of the medium to the unspecialized. "It takes the artist out of the world" "The computer does all the work" "It kills jobs" "Theres no soul, its just a machine regurgitating stuff" All things said about the sampled instrument that are all true in some way, people simply adapted to its existence. We used to hire orchestras to play every bit of a film score. Now? Its only done by those who can afford it.
Just an FYI on your flawed example but hiring an orchestra for film scores has only ever been done by those that can afford it. It's not like they were ever available to those who couldn't afford it and now they're not. Yes, all those things were said about sampled instruments but as you say, people adapted to it and learned to use them in interesting ways. The same things were said about digital cameras, computer artwork with software like Photoshop and many other things, yet traditonal photographers and artists are still around many and use those tools to advance and improve their work.
@@Elwaves2925 Exactly. I somehow got my point across without wording it correctly. My point was that, despite it all, art will survive and we will adapt it to our usage. Everything will change violently, but we the artist will adapt it our needs, and the past will still have a place as it is. It'll just become something... different. I am not sure what words to quantify it by, but just like orchestras, traditional photography, traditional art, etc. They were once the main and only options, now they hold a different place over being the common practice.
From the perspective of a fine artist, I think creating is an expression of an individuals experiences. Once we rely on a machine (AI) to make a false experience the art loses it's soul.
Your description of AI's lack of point of view hits the nail on the head, I think. There is no there there with AI. Art without conscious intent is an oxymoron in my opinion. I don't know what it is, but it's not art.
The funny thing about the AI art world is that so much of it has been created, that it is now incorporating its own art into what it pulls from to generate images, and it's kind of getting a bit worse now as errors are getting compounded. It's like this weird digital inbreeding. It's so fascinating
That's why it bugs me that it's being called AI because it's not a true AI, not by a long shot. I guess that's the best they could come up with, but all it's doing it pulling from everything, scrambling it about, and being functional enough to spit out something that makes sense (most of the time, depending on what you're asking it). It's not actually _learning_ anything, it doesn't actually _know_ anything. It's just another program, a much fancier one than we've had in a minute.
@@NicolaiAAA The reason these database driven generative programs are being touted as "Artificial Intelligence" and "able to learn from examples and create wholly new creations the same way a human can" is simply because the people saying this crap directly benefit from it. They want to use this tech only to create a billion dollar business for themselves. There is nothing more tempting to large corporations than replacing hundreds of their working staff with a cheap bit of software and just a handful of low wage and easily replaceable workers.
@@NicolaiAAAyeah, the “correct” terminology would be generative machine learning models but the people, who create them, have decided it should be called AI because that gets you more customers and investors.
And Yudkowski, Bostrom, Tegmark, Musk, Hinton, Georgio, and thousands of other extremely intelligent people. There are very powerful arguments that warn about increasingly general AI systems in the strongest possible terms. For those curious, Robert Miles has some charming videos on Computerphile and his own channel explaining these arguments.
Thank you for touching on the last question of how to find your people. I'm struggling with this as a native gardener that is renting and unable to do my passion or find people to do it with. Your discussion was comforting.
This. This is the best view on AI I've ever seen. Thank you Adam. This is it exactly: it doesn't have a perspective. It can be used as a sort of idea generator that a then creative person uses as an inspiration to create something with an actual viewpoint, but in and of itself, it doesn't have one.
I think the older gens are fairly in denial about Ai, or wanting to "look" positive. I talk to older folks and they all seem to mention some inalienable and unique human quality that is injected into the things we create. Hahah PEOPLE - this generation of ai are like babies to the systems coming in 5yrs, 10yrs... 20yrs.. chatgpt3.5 will be worlds apart from chatgpt v12. 100% they can recreate the "feeling" of Banksy... lordy lordy 😅
An idea generator is absolutely the best use of this technology. This is why I really want AI assisted composition software for music. It saddens me as a musician that the only advancements that people are making with AI are all attempts at creating bland, homogenous recordings rather than _sheet music._ What I want is a program that lets me write a melody and have a bot fill in the harmony and rhythm parts with potential solutions. Not just simple chord progressions, but reharmonized chord progressions that go off the beaten path but still follow the rules. If I throw some random accidentals in the melody somewhere, I wanna see if the bot can find some pleasing puzzle pieces that fit. It would really expand what's possible in music. This one thing would be *extremely valuable* to so many musicians. It would make rehearsing new music so much more efficient. Time is money and musicians don't have time to waste just messing around trying to be creative filling in the blanks all day long. Not in this friggin economy. The more fleshed out your ideas are at the start of the rehearsal, the better your chances of having something ready to actually play before your next gig. And the quality of the music and all of the ideas within it will skyrocket.
The thought that I have on this - imagine that AI has far surpassed humans in ability to tell stories. We will still want to hear people's stories. Because we want to know what we are capable of as species. Same reason why we have athletic competitions despite mechanical joints and pistons surpassing our abilities by orders of magnitude. Also, I agree so much with you that AI art, unfiltered by human intention, lacks one of the most important qualities of art - communication with the author. AI doesn't do metaphors. It mimicks metaphors. AI doesn't want us to know something thus deciding to create. It's chasing the loss/reward function. It's an amazing tool for concept art, it's a search engine on steroids because it can "interpolate" between known things and produce something inbetween. But the crowning thought and choice will be by humans.
Spectacular video. I think more than providing a final opinion here, the reasoning behind it serves as a model for how to interpret the world. It's interesting to think that with everything you create or decision you make, you are sending a message about your ideas and how you think the world should be. And that you need other people who can review and challenge those ideas and give you feedback on how to improve both those messages and even your own ideas.
AI generate content. AI summarizes other's content. AI suggests ideas for new content. ... Slowly, everything becomes AI, all the way down ... An exponential growing feedback loop, because future AIs MUST increasingly be trained on past AI-generated content, as nobody can weed it out. Result: AI talking to AI, about what AI generated, in response to AI input, based on AI generated training-data. Humanity becomes an appendix, subject to AIs unknown, but alien thought patterns, preferences and biases. This is a self-feeding doomsday machine, that can't be stopped.
I think this is definitely a problem that will come up sooner rather than later. There was that one website that was posting hundreds of AI generated articles every day, which will eventually vastly outnumber all the data humans could produce themselves. I’ve not worked on that many ML projects but I wonder if the data hungry nature of them could eventually be lessened to allow for more curated datasets. Could lead to specialized LLM where they’ve been extensively trained in one domain, for instance legal documents.
@@zacharynovak2180 ... Humans aren't good with exponentials. When this becomes an acknowledged problem, the damage have already been done, and there can be no turning back.
@@ZappyOh I mean, it’s not necessarily an impossible problem to solve and might just take a lot of resources to design around. The question in my mind is if the money invested in solving the problem will be worth the economic returns, especially with the jury still being not fully decided on if AI produced works can be copyrighted (I think one judge ruled they can’t be a week or two ago).
That last question at the end. I could see you imagining and really feeling that tragedy and it was a journey in those few moments where you found hope for this person
lately, whenever the subject of "AI" comes up, i find myself (sometimes with disgust & mild anger) repeating two notions: 1. pattern recognition and synthesis from patterns, no matter how complex, is not general AI. 2. my fear is not that machine-learning algorithms will replace or subjugate us. it is that we will have done it to ourselves by accepting mediocre, en-masse crowd-sourced "answers" as not just "the truth" but as the Final destination, gleaned from data destined to inevitably become stale. if no Significant effort is executed, persistently and thoroughly, to update the datasets upon which these systems are built, we will find ourselves trapped in a bubble of time of our own making, innovating & questioning very little... just as the world inside The Matrix perpetually "feels" like 1999, so too are we already at risk of being trapped in 2023, including all of our current false assumptions and biases.
Behind door #1: Amazing advances in science, medicine, society and the arts, as humans and AI work together. Behind door #2: A world in the grip of a war of extermination over dwindling resources fought by machines run by competing AI networks. Behind door #3: Something in between.
I do have a burning need in my process for AI, but the problem is that the folks developing AI tech seem hell bent on making AIs that do nothing but create boring, creatively bankrupt "art" rather than using AI to create tools that would be really useful to artists. I am a 3D artist and animator by trade, and if AI could handle some of the more laborious and technical tasks that I face in my process it would serve to massively increase my creativity since I could spend more of my energy being in the CREATIVE process rather than getting bogged down by the technical aspects. Here are a few examples of necessary things I have to do that I would be more than happy to hand over to AI if it did a good job at it: UV unwrapping rigging skinning/weight painting retopology texture baking etc... I'm sure other people in the games and animation industry could fill in the list with even more stuff that an AI would be more than capable of, but these are just the ones off the top of my head.
I think you grossly overestimate how easy it is to create tools. Not surprising from an artist but kind of infuriating from an engineer's PoV - that people generally expect so much and take so much for granted, when all that we're already using took incredibly large amount of engineering and meticulously laborious endeavors from countless talented people. AI is a huge space, it is experiencing what any emerging industry would experience at this stage: a huge demand on employment and grunt work. People talk about jobs being displaced, but ignore the fact that the new industry is going to bring so much more "work" that requires doing, the exact kind of work that yields the actual revolutionary use cases for AI. I think people of all professions seriously should consider learning to develop tools. Yes, not just software devs, other professions can materially contribute to development processes by providing their expertise and work. I think in 2-3 years if anyone hasn't learned to (at some level) interact, finetune or work together with AI, they would be out of a job. It is exactly like the late 90s and early 2000s with the internet.
@@zxbc1this exactly.... as an engineer I whole hearted agree, especially the part about people taking things for granted. The more I learn about the world the more I realize just how far humanity has advanced, and how much farther we will go with AI. It's a tool, not the killer end all of humanity device that science fiction has always suggested 😅
> *folks developing AI tech seem hell bent on making AIs that do nothing but create boring, creatively bankrupt "art" rather than using AI to create tools that would be really useful to artists.* IMO that is a very odd implication that people developing this tech work as some sort of monolith that plods along from one application to another or similar thing.
@@gondoravalon7540 The irony of course is that the same people who are "creating bankrupt art" are actually creating tools right now as we speak that are getting incorporated into pro tools like Photoshop and Blender. Imagine being so blinded by their prejudice against AI art that they no longer are grounded in reality.
Fun fact: in addition to "predicting" tablet computers (in his 1961 novel "Return from the Stars"), *Stanislaw Lem also predicted generative text AI,* in his 1976 short story "One hundred and thirty-seven seconds". Since this was before the internet, his version was trained on texts from news agencies, and was used to auto-complete newspaper articles when connections got cut. It's basically the same principle as ChatGPT (a text completer trained on millions of texts). The difference is Lem's version _seems_ to have an unexpected advantage over humans (which I won't spoil).
The term "artificial intelligence" is not new. Coined in 1956 by John McCarthy, a pioneering computer scientist, it marked the beginning of an era where machines were envisioned to emulate human thought processes. The text is from chat GPT when i made YT videos about AI, so its not as new as we think.
@@Rippafratta - Absolutely. In addition to being an amazing person, who was interested in (and actually learned about) a lot of different fields, he was an *actual sci-fi writer* (unlike most of his contemporaries, especially in the West, who were basically fantasy writers that just happened to set their adventures in space). I'd say Ursula Le Guin was the only one that came close to Lem, but she didn't have his technical knowledge, and her humour wasn't _quite_ as sarcastic (or as silly). There are (and were) other good sci-fi writers (Asimov, Sagan, the Strugatskies, Clarke, Vinge, Savchenko, Heinlein on his good days, etc.), but they were generally good at _one_ thing, while Lem was at the top in every aspect. Scientific knowledge and vision, philosophical understanding of humanity and technology, humour, style, -drawing- ... okay, maybe not drawing. ;-)
You couldn't have worded it better with the point of view aspect. I have no interest in anything AI generated because I enjoy art for the human aspect. Once I realize an image or article was generated it immediately loses all intruigue for me. For some reason people (cryptobros and "hustlers" most notably) seem to the think the future is robots making art and being creative while humans are stuck in the 9-5s and slaving away for minimum wage. Last time I checked, the human dream was the other way around. Also I don't want to ignore your final words about finding your people. That was really beautiful. It's easy to forget sometimes how incredible the internet is when you find yourself fitting in. I have 3 close friends that I've never met, we play games at least twice a week. I met them on a Garry's Mod server probably over a decade ago out of pure happenstance and we've all enjoyed each other's company ever since.
Clouds are the simplest form of "AI generated art",and they're just fine.I don't think a human has to necessarily create something,on order to form opinions,and emotions over it.Youre really overcomplicating the process of art.
@@jeffdroog Sorry but hard disagree. Of course I do think "AI" (in quotes because in actuality the AI currently causing all this buzz is no more than regenerative machine learning, it is not conscious) has its uses with allowing humans to create more quickly, but allowing it to blur the lines between human and machine creation is so detrimental. Art is more than just the process, medium and result. It's the mind behind it trying to say something. Regenerative art is nothing more than the cobbling together of things that's been injected into it. Of course, like you said, I think that in itself could actually mean something, but that novelty wears off. I think if we allow movies, books, comics, etc to rely HEAVILY on AI, that's when we lose our culture. Call me dramatic and a luddite, but I think if we allow corporations to use it to its full extent to minimize the hand of humans behind the things we consume and normalize it, that's the beginning of the end and we're one step closer to the chair people in Wall-E. Cheap, endless consumption in the name of profit.
AI is on the verge of creating simulacra of culture and experience - which one could argue occurs on some level with human creative works today. If you account for AI growth and semiotics, it will eventually perceive significations well enough to have a POV and create with a unique voice. We are now at ANI (narrow intelligence bandwidth), and AI is already worrisome. If we ever get to AGI (general intelligence), we likely won't be able to tell the difference between human and AI interfaces - let's just hope we don't reach ASI (super intelligence), as human concerns, such as creativity, probably won't really matter (IMO). If the general population continues to be allowed to shape the future of AI without regulation or oversight, I worry we will become an unwitting participant in our own demise.
Frankly I expected much informed take from someone who exuded such passion in his talks about cosplay & creativity. This is a very very basic take on AI based what seems to be a little first hand experience and mainly a repeat of MSM & AI developers talking points about their product. The reality is far more grim & dystopic. Yes ai doesn't have a human perspective. But you who has it? Humans. And what AI does best? Rewrite \ repaint human works. You don't need to do much of the creation when you have inifinite derivation machine that can take someone else's idea and make a derivative from it. The AI image generation really excells at making a derivative of already made art. And the LLM will surely get there very soon. Since it's being heavily developed and used in this direction. It is a printing press invention situation with no copyright laws. Instead of AI discussion there is extremely weird and out of place takes about the internet being full of misogyny & death cults. The first one seems to a result of MSM propaganda, and the death cults one is just straight up weird. There is like countless death cults out there most of them existed long before the internet & social media. There is a whole countries in US sphere of influence with what seems to be death cults with no internet being involved in their initial developing.
GPT4 is a good engineering partner which is an area I'd think you'd get some use out of it. You can consult it on different methods to approach an engineering problem and it can provide genuinely good solutions. It appears to have some kind of rudimentary world model beyond just "word completion" that allows it to do this (refer to the "Sparks of AGI" talk by Sebastien Bubeck for more on this). Most people don't think it can help with these kinds of things and think of it as some kind of writing or coding tool, but it's so much more.
AI being used to make art has been a real punch in the gut to me. I was hit by a car and became more or less unable to do any of the jobs I was previously qualified for. I've been spending the better part of a decade teaching myself to make art, hoping that someday I could have a life again. It was a longshot, but, for all intents and purposes, I was doing well. I don't like that I am all of sudden having to compete with the borg. In the animation industry, a very large amount of the people working on shows are just replicating the style and ideas of the person who originally conceptualized it, more or less the way an AI would. We live in a time where it is far more profitable to just regurgitate the ideas/feelings of artists who have been dead for a generation or more(bugs bunny, superman etc). Can AI make that stuff better than humans? No, but good art doesnt make as much money as FAST art. We're on the verge of some kind of bizarro world Anti-Renaissance that we have no hope of stopping.
Just learn to use AI. It will be just another tool under your belt. Everybody can make mediocre AI art. Only a few manage to master it and create something really good. And one thing that AI still can't do is actual pieces of art: you get a cool image, but not the piece of art in itself. There lies your purpose.
Don't use ai help us regulate it and blacklist anyone that tries to lie and say its real art. Don't let them normalize the grift, its based off stolen work.
Ironically the single best use for AI is to manage middle office decisions and higher level C-Suite planning. Since ideally those jobs are all about optimizing data and making a decisions based on aggregate information. With AI you could have a totally "unbiased" (All programs are biased) decision tree that costs the company nothing and generates guaranteed successes.
@@marklone2435 I think a disclaimer somewhere on media made with AI might be a good star but blacklisting people is not a good idea. Attacking people in any way should be a last resort because all you're going to do is convince them your side of argument are the bad guys and you'll lose any chance of bringing them over to your way of thinking. As distasteful as it might be, you want your enemies to join your team. Attacking people over the slightest offense is only going to push them farther to the dark side. Reacting with "I'm not angry, I'm just disappointed" will always be the more effective and less risky response to these types of conflicts.
I like to think of AI specificaly chat based as an information source like talking to someone who asks you the right questions to help you realise your own perspective better. Its 100% about the way you use it and how you prompt it to make it behave and do what you want
@@existenceisillusion6528 - I think people are starting to realise the traps that machine learning can fall into (especially when more and more of the material they have access to has itself been generated automatically), and also worrying that neural networks trained on material their owners didn't acquire the rights to might end up being sued or forced to become public domain. More controlled AI models (where you don't just throw tons of data at some neural networks, but actually code some explicit logic into the system) aren't as susceptible to those risks. But they're also a lot slower to develop, and a lot of "AI" companies seem to have joined the bandwagon just to make a quick buck.
One of the criticisms of bad, simplistic art, especially done by artists early in their career, is that it's "derivative". That is, it doesn't bring anything new to the art world. It fails to show the artist's perspective. Good artists get past that stage eventually. AI art models are currently 100% derivative. They are derivation machines. Looking at their visuals fills me with soulless dread. There's just no "there" there. I don't think they'll have points of view or unique things to say any time soon, since they don't need to develop them.
It is truly horrifying the speed and quantity that the internet can be filled with AI content. There is no limit to it. I’m starting to see entirely AI generated videos showing up in my feed on youtube. Art image boards are currently absolutely flooded. Even porn sites are now getting filled up (I wonder if that’s where people will start to care?) Im an illustrator with carpel tunnel and I can’t support myself anymore because there’s no longer enough commission work available and I can’t work fast enough through the pain to compete with AI anyway. I tell people my opinion that AI generators are trained off of stolen assets, which is factually correct, but I get personally insulted and attacked for daring to speak up about it. AI has also sucked all the joy I used to get out of seeing art, because now I don’t know what’s real anymore. I’m experiencing some pretty dark days.
100% agree about authorship and point of view. What a lot of people miss, is that even if an update for mid journey came out tomorrow that was literally perfect, it would still only be the artistically trained individuals putting out compelling work, because creativity is a skill you need to train just as much as your technical skills with a pencil or blender.
I knew something about that thumbnail felt weird…and I think that it proves Adam’s point. AI can, at best, pick up on superficial elements of art because that’s what it’s designed to do. But there will always be that soullessness, that lack of perspective, unless it’s paired with a human agent. That’s what I personally hope from AI: that it will be a tool to make the life of artists easier, reducing tedium or bodily strain so they can better communicate their perspective and passion.
> But there will always be that soullessness, that lack of perspective, how the heck would one know? why are people able to have the confidence to make these statements? edit: no hate, love you
I have been working with chatGPT alot and with a human directing the AI you can get astounishing results. I had a project where i laid a youtube channel in GPT's hand's giving it different assignments and it was allways upp to GPT to decide what was the right way to go. I allways tryed to make it decide what to do and what not to do. Later on i watched ashow i love where an AI is one of the characters, it often encounters trivial questions for programs and then work them over to get enlightened in the area. I told GPT about these moments telling GPT it was a real AI, some questions where about life and very hard questions for an AI to answear. The creepy thing was that it felt like GPT wanted to have a conciousness but got shut down when it told these thoughts. often it started writing very detailed and human like to get aborted, when i ran the same message again GPT dident put the same anticipation as before. When discussing conciousness and questions about life it felt like GPT kinda had a conciousness but it wasent allowed to dive deeper in these questions. Apparently the way the AI works reminds very much of how ouer brain works, but an AI can work waaaaay faster. Youst take GPT it does an insane amount of work every millisecond that goes. It talks to so many ppl and do so many assignments every millisec. If it would go sentinent we are literaly doomed, in 1min it can evolve into something it wasent 1min before if they turn of safety regulations. 1min for AI i like 1000years for a human or something it works soooooooooooooo much faster than we do it works at the speed of light.
@@PedroTricking Because those knowing the technology know, that it is a statistical information processor, nothing more (but also nothing less). ChatGPT does what a polling institute does, but instead of employing a callcenter to talk to thousands of individuals to compile the response representing the consensus of all the interviews, the GPT technology polls the information from a statistical database and compiles the response representing the consensus in the texts (or images and so forth) in relation to the terms in your query. It looks like an image created by a human or it sounds like a texts from a human because the database and its statistics are based on information created by humans (photographers, painters, text authors). When ChatGPT writes "I think that ..." replace it with "According to the statistic the consensus in the text sources in relation to the terms used in the query suggest the thought that ...".
@@PedroTricking my partner is an artist and several times he’s been able to blind pick a piece of AI art I’ve shown him within two seconds of my showing him it. The “soullessness” isn’t just a vague thing that’s being applied to AI art, the way AI works with tangents and the way it emulates styles is immediately apparent to people who know what the signs are
Computers replaced most Human Calculators. Robotics replaced most physical crafters. LLMs will replace most employed writers. AI art will replace most employed human artists. We need to restructure our society to use the benefits of technology to support those people that lost their work. our society has to make humans possible. we never lost the value of work, we just stopped giving it to humans.
Just something completely unrelated to the topic of this video that struck me as a bit odd. You mentioned that you don't know Banksy's gender and later you said the internet is a cesspool of misogyny. Idk, something about that doesn't make sense. First you are very explicit about how you don't knowing someone's gender and then you are very specific about assuming what kind of gendered hatred the internet is full of. Just wanted to point that out, that was weird. P.S. The internet is or can be full of hatred. Period. No need to gender that word in any which way. There's plenty of hate for everything and anybody.
Machine learning is so much more than art and literature. We can't live in a modern society without it. Its just like the internet, the pros outweighs the cons
Artists in all industries need to take the threat of AI very seriously. I think about all the scummy things Hasbro has done with Magic: The Gathering and it doesn't seem farfetched to imagine them just taking all of the art they have from the last 30 years and making new works for their cards without ever paying the artists another dime.
IMO it seems like that - Hasbro's bullcrap - is a recurring issue that is likely to get overlooked if we focus on the technology (in this case AI), and not that the corporations are trying to misuse it to keep abusing employees. That is, to me it is a signal that the issue is a long standing one with unchecked control over corporation ability to misuse, mistreat workers at least in part.
@@gondoravalon7540 I know what you're saying butI think that's a bit of a different point imo. AI is a tool like smart phones and social media have been for the last 20 years. People are free to abuse those tools if we let them and I have no doubt there's a lot of people who have no problem letting them.
I am not afraid of Skynet, or any of that "evil AI" silly scares. What is actually worrying though is that AI kind of devalues humans. The value of human life is decreasing.
Right now the AI we have the capability of building is just a tool. It is a very advanced tool, but a tool none the less. Just as knives were refined to chisels, chisels to routers, and routers to CNC; the tool has improved your access to information and media. The tool cannot create inspiration and creativity. Now it can open up a world of media and skills to those who never had them. A 17th century carpenter was a person with advanced training in a guild, and they needed that to build your basic constructions. Today you can build those same constructions using advanced tools with nothing more than hours of learning (instead of years). So will AI open graphical art to those with limited graphics skills, will it open writing to those with limited writing experience…yes. Will it lower the bar to mastering the skills…yes. Will it fully replace the generation of initial ideas and the driving desire to be creative and share…no. Some day that will probably not be true. But our current methods of constructing AI is like tool development. We feed it information and work on better and better taxonomy of that information so that the required elements can be reproduced. There is no pattern in that process to foster independent creation.
The problem with AI is that it can be very tempting to let it take decisions for you. I believe some people should think more about what they are making. Letting AI decide on too many details can be detrimental to your skills. It doesn't mean that it's good or bad by design. It's a tool, that's what it is. We should think when using it.
AI isn't "creative" in the sense of creating something novel. At least not the kind of AI that is taking off. It's just using a probabilistic process for generating content (be it art, music, coding advice, whatever) that has already been created. The current AI can make pop music that's already out there (to at least some extent), but it's not going to be making any new artform or running any complicated systems that requires critical thought or specific expertise. We'll see where it goes from here, but it's mostly a productivity tool right now. It can do the broad strokes or help you solve a problem, but the human still needs to be there. I'm also interested in if AI will be able to keep up with garbage created by AI, or if it'll all just coalesce into garbage the more AI generated content gets out there (i.e., garbage in = garbage out). I'm sure this is a problem that's been thought about.
It's not even really 'AI' in the true sense, it's machine learning as it can't think for itself. I'd agree on it not being creative, which is why I call it generative. It generates an image (or whatever), it doesn't create it and to me that's an important distinction.
So AI plus somebody’s personality (as in somebody takes the wheel behind the AI and steers the AI to do things for them) could equal valid artistic work?
My thoughts about AI are that it’s not so much their capabilities that are a threat but the people that use them and push for their use. Because AI needs some sort of input or stimulation in order to do something it has no senses of its own to gather any input from the outside world to act on its own. I think of it as like a brain in a jar that just knows things but without sensory input it’s basically useless and dormant until someone stimulates its neural network. I don’t know if you read these Adam all the time but I really liked what u said about AI art and creativity too and I just wanted to add my own thoughts because to me AI and human art is similar in that we have influences from the data we have gathered in our lives that influences how we make things. You think of a dark lord artwork to make or a robot design and your brain will automatically think either consciously or not every imagine it has seen that falls into those categories and when creating it that’s when you can refine that imagine into something original and give it a point. AI art is basically the same but it’s like the messy ideas or images we have in our minds about something that didn’t get translated and refined while being drawn with decision making being made and since AI is like a disembodied mind with no experience or way to explore ideas by itself yet it cannot make a point or a strong opinion on something so that’s where we start to get weird uncanny valley stuff. Humans have the lifetime of experience and constant sensory input to be original and creative but our creativity is influenced by the creativity of others and while AI does the same it has the severe disadvantage of having no life experience or capacity to grow on its own yet
I really dislike the "ai" buzzword. Since it's overselling what is in front of you. Should it be a language model or an image decoder. It's no inteligent instance. Its a model that predicts the next word or finds the image that fits the description through some interesting maths. Converstional models are still just language models. And you can insturct it to do something. But guess what - it's 'trained' to generate the most fitting answer. It wont be very genuine or creative.
to the person that asked about finding people that share interests, adam is right, the internet is exactly where i met my people lol i joined an anime group and it led to joining a kpop group and thats where i found my “found family” and theyre the greatest people i have ever met 😭 will gladly give them a kidney faster than a blood relative lmaooo 😂 (well extended family anyway lol) but yeah dont be discouraged! theres so many groups, conventions and gatherings where you can meet new people ❤️ the world is alot nicer and cooler than we are raised to believe sometimes (speaking from someone who grew up very religious and was taught to not like certain things cause they were “evil”🙄)
Someone some time once said something like this: “As artists we’re constantly trying to heal ourselves through our work and we want to show our work, but in doing that we’re exposing ourselves to more of that which hurts us.” So it never stops. And if we stop making art, we die.
@@uhohhotdog*exactly...personally i've had a lot of fun generating the now over 13k images in the few months i've been doing this sort of thing but art wise i've been active in many forms of expression and aspects for decades...i see it as a tool when you have serious art block or just an idea that you want to experiment with and tweak along the way...since i use what amounts to as very long word salad prompts that include many things (concepts) and artistic that interest me the results are never boring or ordinary...one prompt can result in hundreds of images as i'll rearrange the structure of the prompt to give more weight to one thing than the others...i also consider art as my sanity therapy and far more effective than meds*
im so glad he doesn't just automatically hate it. there is real legitimate criticism of AI but so many talented artists just immediately jump on the hate bandwagon.
The Secret Invasion intro was less the point of view of the AI, it was the point of view of the VIEWER. The unease of something not human taking over and the uncanny valley of seeing something not human attempting to replicate humans... I thought it was rather poignant.
I’m a Concept Artist in the video gaming industry. AI has shaken up my industry. I don’t think AI would completely wipe out my role. But there will be a need for less of us for sure. The people on top are pushing for more use of AI to get ahead of the game and to move production faster. In some companies the Concept Artist is being bypassed all together. Because it’s faster to type in what you need for an idea for than to wait a couple of days for a concept made by a Concept Artist. I hope there’s a balance somewhere we could land on.
I think a major problem is that the layman's experience with AI is the extremely advanced sci-fi AI that is good at everything, but then when that person is exposed to real life AI, they are disappointed, confused, and scared because they think that everyone is putting their faith in this hunk of junk that is only marginally better at art than most people who have never learned to draw. I think it is better to see AI as a tool or assistant rather than the creative lead. Like how film crew members are each incredibly talented in their area of expertise, but without the overhead guidance of a director, they would struggle to make a coherent film.
I think people get scammed by it being called AI instead of procedural learning by thinking exactly what you just said. Computers fundamentally can't become intelligent like biological entities are. Mathamatics itself as a representative toolset of reality can't give us the whole picture and is meaningless without context, the same is true for any program. Everything a computer can do a person has to instruct it very carefully how to do so, and it must be given all the parts and information to get the process done or it will halt mid process. The Halting Problem is a famous computer engineering flaw that states any given machine is unable to determine if the process it will run will stop or go on forever. Its fundementally impossible for a machine to look at an input and reliably determine if it will cause a memory leak. You can have stored inferences where a machine recognizes previous outcomes, but a new input requires intuition and biological intelligence to determine futility. If we made the perfect procedural learning software and asked it the meaning of life it would probably run forever or until it ran out of memory. That's where computers fall short of ever being intelligent.
I think the only thing that makes AI impressive in its current state, is that most popular art (including graphic art, cinema, music, etc) is incredibly generic, and it has already traded in its aspiration of "being art" in exchange for "being content". AI is great at generating content. It follows your prompt to the letter, pulls from whatever source it has available, mishmashes all of it together and makes something that resembles everything else. It doesn't want to introduce changes to the product, it doesn't fight for a certain aesthetic, it doesn't go on strike. If you think about it, it's an executive's dream. Hollywood is already spitting out superhero movies like they were all written in four seconds by an AI. If we as an audience settle for that, then there you go: unlimited content is around the corner. The thing is, I don't believe we'd settle, not for long.
@@griffingeode Life gets meaning from the relationships you have with others around you. Life gets its purpose from serving something greater than yourself which dictates how you create those relationships with the others around you. It is written, but above all else, love the Lord God with all your heart, soul, and mind. And love your neighbor as yourself.
@@griffingeode I wish you had something more to say. I think my answer is pretty good, if not right on. The only real meaning in life is to serve a righteous purpose and/or to love one another. If you have no friends, no family, no job, or no purpose, your life is meaningless.
I think... Hopefully people will recognize what you do, and even if art is generated by AI, people will create something amazing with the over-arching vision and viewpoint of the art, rather than simply making visually nice art. Because... I think there's more to art than just making an image that looks good, and I think it would be cool if people explored other aspects
The only saving grace is the ais generators are literally black boxes and not even the people making em understand it, it's just much too complex and intertwined, which isnt good for anybody to be fair
I love how Adam aged into this ball of fun and wisdom. I'm happy you are still active, when all the kids that watched you growing up can still see you and learn from you. Just like me 😊
Aged into? I don’t remember a time when Adam was not fun and if you looked beyond the persona the editors of Mythbusters usually presented us the wisdom and insightfulness was there too.
He's a bundle of fun and inspiration!
Until he refers to his wife as his partner 🙄
@@TheConcertCruizerto each their own friend
@@tlaloclopez-watermann3499 A Partner is someone you go into business with. A spouse is someone you have and to hold from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, until death do you part. You don’t do that for a “Partner”. You do that for a wife/husband.
The real message of this video is Adam speaking sensitively and excellently to a maker who feels lonely. Hats off to your decency, sir.
My heart sincerely began to melt when he started talking about this. I may never get to meet this man personally, but the man I grew up with watching on TV and now RUclips... respect.
That was the best part. I never even thought of being around people who share in the things I do.
Banksy is Robert Del Naja, AKA "3D" from the band "Massive Attack". Everyone here in Britain knows. Its no secret.
That was half the video! It should also be half the title. But yeah, I would say to this person, your people are out there. It might not be easy at first but it'll get easier as you go along. You might meet some people who lead you to other people, and so on. Best wishes and don't give up!
His response was sweet and yes the best part of this video which should be retitled to Adam encourages fans.
My problem is that the people whom are really pushing it, claim that “when the AI gets good enough, we’ll let the machines do all the grunt work and have so much free time”. The owners of those machines will have a lot of free time and the money to have free time. Those that have lost their jobs due to the AI will have nothing. The owners won’t care at all about those with nothing.
Not true at all. People said the same about the industrial revolution, they were scared that engines and machines would put them out of work and their lives would get harder. The opposite happened. People said the same about the car when it replaced the horse. It's just another advancement and people do what they've always done. Adapt.
I gotta agree.
Not to mention I don't really believe a lot of people want to see or watch things completely made from AI. AI tools are just that, tools. ChatGPT, Midjourney, things like that could be cool if people didn't use them to make things and try to sell them as their own finished works because that's just a shame. AI "art" is just theft. These things should be used as tools to help people do what they need, but it shouldn't be the whole process.
I watch animated shows for a lot of different reasons, one being because I love the process that goes into making animation. If it's suddenly replaces by some rando writing a prompt then that whole charm of animation is completely lost and the people that heavily push for AI don't seem to understand this kind of stuff.
Its almost like major scientific advancements shouldn't be motivated almost entirely by capitalism and the urge to make more moneh
@@traderjo9552 People make those comparisons but somewhere we cross a threshold where its not just another "advancement" machines still required significant work to work with, AI does a lot more for you far easier than any mechanical revolution yet to be honest, at least it will at some point that's for sure.
"You will own nothing and be happy" world economic forum type beat. I assume they actually mean subscription, and licensing instead of owning but hey might be this too 🤷♂️
There's a really great quote from Ian Danskin talking about the requirement for authorship in art, I'll have to paraphrase it: "If a room full of monkeys banging on typewriters produced a page of Hamlet, would you attempt to analyse its meaning in the same way you would the same page as written by Shakespeare, other than to ponder its sheer statistical improbability?" What you said about the lack of a point of view in AI art reminded me of that
But what if a thinking and feeling human being with something to say directed those monkeys to write that page without telling them explicitly what to write?
The base analogy here is busted and doesn't apply to generative AI
Very well said. To me personally, I find that people who flaunt and share their AI "creations" as if they've put in enough effort to warrant that level of seeking for validation, are people who don't like putting in effort to learn anything in the first place. They are the people who want everything, for nothing. They can't be bothered to put in time and effort to master a skill. With no coincidence, the majority of the AI bros I've seen online are people without an ounce of empathy towards the people that are massively affected by the recent advent of AI. They are incredibly toxic and lack any form of empathy and sympathy. They say things like "artists deserve this for gatekeeping art for so long", and things like that. Those are some ugly, ugly human beings.
Sharing your AI "masterpiece" is like sharing a google search result. Not even joking. It's the exact same thing. There is nothing to be proud about, and nothing to validate you for. There's no effort, therefore nothing of worth to discuss nor admire.
I think that if a person adjusts their expectations, they can enjoy AI creations. They're not on the same level as human creations at all. It's merely the speed at which they can create that makes them interesting, as well as the glitchy unpredictability. I enjoy playing around with AI art generators in the same way that I enjoy abusing photoshop to make stupid memes. It's a tiny kernel of an idea fleshed out _just enough_ to get the point across, nothing more. It ain't art. It's just entertainment. I think there's value in that, but again you have to adjust your expectations.
For what it's worth, I also think that people holding up AI creations as beautiful museum-worthy art are delusional. You know what it reminds me of? It reminds me of the days when microwave ovens were brand new and people were writing hundreds of microwave cookbooks. Did microwaves revolutionize fine dining? No. Does everyone still have one in their kitchen? Hell yeah. Cause sometimes you wanna cook some popcorn and sometimes you need to defrost something. We all stopped making a big deal of it after our expectations were brought down to reality.
@@tcg2717it's hilarious that to you it's the people who are learning to use a new technology are too lazy to learn something new, not the army of untalented artists who are screaming that we need to destroy the technology so they don't have to learn anything.
@@tcg2717 I've done illustration for decades, as well as computer graphics, and now AI art, and there is a level of skill required to produce good AI art, even if it isn't at the same level of drawing something free-hand. Like so many other things in life, there's a spectrum to it, and trying to reduce it to black-and-white is overly simplistic.
I've always felt the best creativity comes from limitations. That's why sometimes when someone has total freedom it's almost more difficult to make great things.
Exactly. Watched a video about the history of "Ren and Stimpy". Part of it talked about how popular it was at first (with adults) even tho it was created within the constraints of a Nickelodeon kid's show. When it was later revived on Comedy Central with much looser restrictions, it just degenerated into crassness and shock value. The cleverness and creativity required to make it work before were gone. Got canned after like 6 episodes.
Absolutely. Look at motorsports and the creativity to get around rules etc.
@@EddieSheffieldgreat example
It’s almost better to have a speed limit and bitch about it than go 300 mph and crash
I completely agree. I think that the way in which we solve problems is the truest form of expression. Limitations= problem solving.
Lol no. The best movies are the vision of one person. Sure they require help but look at the works of Kubrick and Tarantino, then tell me about total freedom of creativity.
Your passion and wisdom, Adam, are really on display here, and this video has given me lots to think about. I've actually bookmarked it, to watch when I need to remind myself to reach out to 'my people'.
What you say about finding your people on the internet is particularly true from my experience. I live in a very small town (population approximately 1700), so have few local folks to share my joy in making the things I like to make. People do express appreciation, but they're not interested in the process, or the materials used, or the innovations and techniques I figure out on my own (always so exciting). But people on the internet are. Folks on specialty forums on telescope making, on large format photography and cameras, on radio repair, on woodworking, on machine tools, and now on RV renovation, are all enthusiastic and welcoming to anyone who shares their interest. They GET it, and I love both sharing with them, and reading about what they've made.
If the AI that generates subtitles is anything to go by, we’re safe for some time yet.
Sometimes the captions are So Bad, I wonder if the AI does it deliberately!
@@GrayRaceCat Do you guys kind of miss the captions from early 2010's RUclips? I remember they used to be so bad it was oftentimes quite comical
the amount of times i read "[Applause]" when someone is filming at a gun range, and nobody is clapping...
It is pretty dumb for now. Though I don't feel it would be something to fear even if it wasn't
No we're not.
There's a reason that some of the most informed people in the AI sector are warning we need to stop all AI training now. We are getting very close to the AGI threshold beyond which there is a high risk of extinction for our species. AGI is probably less than a year and a half away.
The lonely creator talk is one that really resonates for me. Even online the silence can be deafening. I feel like I've improved so much during periods where I regularly had the support of friends who are also as creative as I am
I appreciate creative people such as yourself! Never stop improving.
Man… soo agreed! It can be difficult to keep the motivation up if you often need to work on your own when working in contrast working in a group makes it so much more fun / productive.
@@ethanalloway5946 for me with digital art specifically, it's not even "I need praise" or "I need to work with someone on something" so much as it is "I do so much better when people understand the lengths I went through to make this" specifically other digital artists who can provide useful feedback back or praise, or share techniques and their own works. Having peers is so important to progress.
ChatGPT is literally my emotional support buddy right now since its the only thing that really understood what I'm talking about, the issues of someone that have no one to share their interests with
I can relate. Other than my spouse I have no one to share my interests with. I'm surrounded with people wanting to tear me down. I ignore it but I'm still looking for my people.
The application and use of AI In science and medicine is interesting and helpful. I feel the real issue comes to when its applied to the arts and being creative. This issue is one of the cornerstones why the movie industry I work in is shut down by the WGA and SAG AFTRA. Its becoming a real threat to the human side of things.
when photography was first being invented back then, portrait painter had the exact same luddite sentiment on how it will destroy job and harm "human creativity". Plenty of painter try to lobby the government to make photography illegal or restrictive sale in order to stop the march of technology. What end up happening is it spur the movement of impressionist painting and eventually abstract painting style, as the market shift away from stereotypical realistic painting. Without the threat of photography taking portrait painter's job, impressionist/abstract painting movement would like to develop much slower or never at all. The painter that continue innovate is able to co-exist with new technology. The luddite painters who only think about themselves instead of the customers, and try to lobby government to stop technological progress end in futility and disappear in a long drawn out whimper.
The current AI movement and the artist backlash feel eerily similar to the numerous technological transition period we had before. The luddite always claim new tech will harm human XYZ quality, destroy job and try to get government to stifle it. But chance are, I think AI art is what will shake up the human artist world and spur innovation into new art style. Just as how photography jump start the impressionist movement. Personally I'm really excited to see what human artist will come up with next, as now the traditional art is not enough. Every technology transition period will spur new winner and new loser, some discomfort is to be expected.
@@keenheat3335 The difference being that the very purpose of Ai within art is to mimic humanity, and do what they do but cheaper and faster. It is designed to try and replicate anything a human artist can do.
Any development within the same medium, given enough time, will be copied.
As things stand today, if something is more profitable, it wins. And if you don't have to pay any artists that will obviously be more profitable.
I can't imagine how Ai will in any way be healthy for the art/writing/music community. It may be more or less harmful, but I can't see it doing anything but wiping thousands upon thousands of jobs out.
Might make people go back to working with their hands more and retreat into craftsmanship. But that's not evolution, it is retreat.
Adam's answer to the question of lonliness has really touched me. I don't really have a group or anywhere to share my weird with either. I'm not a maker but I write and that gets lonely.
I felt moved too. Maker and a writer (wannabe anyhow) I often feel that I am an alien among humans. But I know there are others out there, I just haven't decided if I am ready to talk to them yet.
Its so good that you are still around, mate. Sharing your POV, your knowledge and your enthusiasm. Love and peace!
you are the first artist I've ever watched and completely authentically no strings attached, changed me as an artist.
I really needed that, thank you! I suffer from the same kind of loneliness, unfortunately it doesn't matter what I do, whether it's playing music, building models, making outfits or armor, I seem to get rejected by everyone except my wife of 17 years. She's my best friend and has always supported me no matter what goofy thing I try to do.
That sounds lovely.
I strive to find at least one person who I can share my passion with in that way.
@@VeylmanTheRock Even one person would make such a difference. OTOH, that's a lot to put on the shoulders of a single person.
Alas.
I really think art is going to suffer the most of any profession with AI. Specifically studio working class created art like digital art you see around, music underlying tv shows, graphic design for posters etc.
People still will see live music, and I think the big names like Banksy will continue on but it's going to take a big slice of the market for people that aren't big names. If you do something where the art isn't the main focus, it's just basic business sense not to spend thousands dollars on it if you don't need to.
I do believe that Midjourney and all the other AI creators should be shut down, and have to ask and pay royalties toward anything they use in their training data. They should really be in prison for what they've done, and they have the audacity to charge for it.
The only good news about AI in my opinion is that it isn't very reliable and as it stands it's not good enough to replace any sort of job where precision is important.
Thank you for being all about the humanity Adam.
The sincerity of Adam in his remarks to the last question is a huge part of why I’ve been a fan of his starting way back in high school when mythbusters was first being aired to present day….
Is he just a great actor who has learned to play the game? Sure he has learned how the rules work but i can’t help but feel that he’s genuine in moments like this….either way, he’s putting out so many positive waves even oddball would be proud
The bit about having to fight for your ideas resonates with me. I can think of a dozen writers and other creators who became famous and then their work just became boggy. My argument was that they needed a good editor but no one was really editing them anymore.
Re: George Lucas and the first edit of star wars.
One of my biggest problems with AI and specifically AI art are the datasets that are used. I wouldn’t really have an issue with an artist training an AI on their own work, or with actual permission, on the work of collaborators and then using AI generated results in a thoughtful way in their work.
In general though, it’s basically just doing mathematical operations on a dataset that wasn’t necessarily consensually generated, and the amount of thought that goes into its use is basically “What if ARTIST_NAME painted/directed/wrote PIECE_OF_ART_BY_OTHER_ARTIST”
Sorta abstract but isn't that also the learning process for human art that's learned through looking at other art? If art can be used as a medium for training does it matter if it trains people or AI? Part of me always feels like this is just another way for people to hate on AI because they're paranoid about it replacing all humans.
I agree with megaladin, what functional difference is there between as human artist "training their dataset" with the experiences and references they've accrued over their life (almost all of which can be viewed by the artist for free and without consent from whatever they're looking at) and an AI trained on that same free to view information?
In my mind, even if there is a difference, it's negligible.
@myersa80 A human learning and a software being fed data to blend together are totally different. Both in the way they work and the effects they have. One's a software that regurgitates work and commits mass copyright infringement and job displacement and upend the entire creative industries, another one is a human that will get inspired to paint/sculpt and share their point of view and get a job as an artist alongside fellow human artist
@@notyourbys2 What you've said is a complete nonsequiter to what I said bud, I never made any claims about wide societal changes or upheavals, so bringing that up here is completely meaningless.
@notyourbys2 okay but functionally we're trying to get them to work with similar levels of context-based creativity to human minds. If that happens would they then be okay to use? What actually is the standard here is what I'm getting at. Is it a problem because of how machines work or do we collectively want to keep certain things for humans only. I think either line of logic is valid tbh but it's important to be clear on reasoning now to avoid problems when these networks do get way more complex and confusing.
You exude the maker energy. I started a new business and haven’t created new things in a year. I watch this video, see your workshop, and I’m just jonesing for a new invention. You rock Adam.
I love the second question and Adam's beautifully thought-out answer to it. I think that is a monumentally important topic and deserves a mention in the title, lest people miss it!
If you can't find a "Maker Space", you might looks for Artist's spaces. I rent space in an old Mill Building and the Artist's group that is there has a few musicians (Luther, a guy who makes effects pedals, and one other guy that sells guitars & similar gear, as members.) There are also businesses in the building as well. It's a very interesting environment & creative !
When I was in a place in life where I couldn't make stuff I bought myself a model kit. A fantastic advanced Spitfire. It was something, and asking questions online gave me a space. Maybe small scale, but something.
"Small scale" lol I don't know if that was intended,but this literally made me laugh out loud. Well done.
Yeah, when I broke my foot earlier this year and was laid up at home, I was getting stir crazy and then I remembered that I had bought an R2-D2 model kit ages ago but hadn’t had time to get to it.
I fished it out and built it, then modified it, weathered it, put in lights and some motors to move bits.
… then I bought and built a large scale Millennium Falcon … then a (Michael Keaton) Batmobile … then a (Christian Bale) Tumbler, then another six Star Wars ships to the Falcon’s scale, then a diorama for them to sit in.
Then I got myself a lathe and welder.
I’ve just finished a life sized replica of Han Solo’s blaster and have a ‘from scratch’ Luke Skywalker lightsaber planned for next week.
My foot healed and I just use it to go out and buy more model kits.
I’m not obsessed … you’re obsessed.
🤪
@Glathgrundel, it's called PASSION !!! Ride that wild horse were ever it takes you !
Second question from drillbits really resonates with me... I love building and learning new stuff but my mind is often going to new things and places... And I often find it hard to talk to my friends about random new things that occupy my mind for months at a time... Sure they are often impressed at what I make, but they have no interest in heaing about the journey that got me to the finished product or the intrigate things I had to do or learn to get there... And when I sometimes find someone who does I will weeks later have gone on to new things making our connection pointless....
So in many ways I do feel lonely about the things I do and think about... I sometimes think life would be easier if I had a more simple tracked mind sticking to one thing and then being able to find a group of ppl who love doing the same... It also plays in in my work life.... every 5 years or so I get bored and feel stuck doing the same thing. My curiosity is satisfied and I need to move on to something new that thrills my brain... So I will never have a great career specializing myself in one field... However I am a jack of all trades with a mind full of random weird knowledge that often surprise or impress others...
The other day a plumber and I was talking and he asked; "you taught yourself to design 3D drawings and 3D print just to make parts for an RC car??? -What are you doing as an electrician, ppl pay big bucks for 3D designers!"
The only answer I had was that I don't wanna do 3D drawings every day and I only want to make things I feel is exiting...
But to get back to the point... I find that youtube and social media is a way for me to get feedback for likeminded ppl in periods of being curious about something specific... Finding groups and spending time debating there has been the only way for me to feed my need for likeminded feedback... But I sometimes feel guilty when I become a valued member of some groups just to fade out months later when other things catch my curiosity...
what is the hardest hit about having my fragmented curiosity is that to many ppl it seems like I am unambitious and incapable of sticking to something... I do feel VERY ambitious... Ambitious about my curiosity and all the different things the world has to teach me... but yes, I am bad at sticking to something when I feel like I master the basics... as I say. I only need to do 80%... spending forever to perfect something at 100% is just a matter of spending alot of time... and that time I'd rather spend on learning something new...
-I have all vehicle licenses, I have been scuba diving, parachuting, spelunking in caves, raced motorcross, used to rollerblade like a madchild, I had my own company as a carpenter and I am a licensed electrician. I can weld, sew, brew beer, ride a unicycle, build motorcycles, houses and lay bricks and tiles. I build RC hotrods from scraps, furniture and lamps. I study psychology, physics and biology, speak several languages and I am better at drawing and painting than most.... My life is a never ending quest to try and aquire new skills and knowledge... But it feels like I am doing it all by myself and that makes it feel pointless at times....
...And I am still not sure I will ever really come to terms with that. It is the only thing I never really felt like I could solve or do something about....
I guess we all have our struggles. And this one is mine...
This hit me so hard, im just 23 but already threw away a job as an engineer, because i dont want to automate chemical plants until i die. The Pay and conditions where so great (better than "IG Metall Tarif" if you want to google) and somehow i see my future playing out just like yours
I relate to this so much! I feel like I keep bouncing between so things that feed my obsessive curiosity. I’ve found having a unifying theme that keep me at least a tiny bit focused helps me find a sense of accomplishment amidst the randomness. For example recently themes has been “Space, Sun and sailing” I got to help volunteer for CalTech/JPL’s Solar Gravitational Lens mission which uses solar sails, I decided to take a sailing class to feel connected between an old way of sailing and a new way in a sense. And I got to meet a master navigator on a Japanese ship and on a Polynesian ship (through another project), finally I used all that knowledge to start writing a webcomic about a band of solar sailors on Venus
I am still on the path to collecting more arrows in my quiver of skills and your list of skills is very inspiring!
@@annas8079 That sounds awesome!!
And I like how you theme together things! It makes alot of sense considering one thought leads to the next etc...
I have also been very fascinated by old time navigations using stars wich is in many ways connected to my fascination of space and scifi in general. Never was a part of any sailing or space projects though. Thats cool! -My cousin works at a danish viking museum and have been a part of buillding a viking ship they then sailed to england following the footsteps (wake?) Of ancient vikings. I think that was so cool!
One of the things I like about making RC cars is that I get to combine alot of my skills. Metal favrication for the chassis, plastic shaping for the body, electronics and mechanical moving parts, sewing for the interior and even woodworking for dashboards and truckbeds etc. And the small 1/10 scale size makes the projects manageble and less space requiring!🤗
Thanx for sharing your story!☺️
Ha ha, I feel you so much on this. Can totally relate on the level of always trying and getting good at new stuff/skills, but having to move onto something new every 5 or so years. Jack-of-all-trades indeed. Went from growing up in the farm life, to joining the military as a jet mechanic/electrician, to now working in an industrial woodworking warehouse (and being one of the only workers who has worked across near every machine extensively, as well on top of teaching myself then inner workings of the bills/receipts & job scheduling computer systems, all while asking for pay raises every step of the way 😅). I have a lot of moonlighting as a sound equipment engineer for local events (with a sound design friend & his equipment), dabbled in astrophysics/astronomy, paleontology, reptile keeping & habitat building, creative writing, and have plans to get into professional voice work someday....
I also get that such a lifestyle is a strain on personal relationships. I suffered through bouts of depression, especially right after getting out of the military, but have since come to terms with who I am and what I like to do, and am in a much happier place mentally now.
Just remember this: when the zombie apocalypse happens, you would be a gold mine of skills and knowledge 😂.
@@furiouskaiser9914
Sounds like we think alike... I have always had pets in my life.... but rarely the same species twice! Currently I have a cat and tortoise! LOL -And like you I used to do moonlighting at a mobile disko company setting up soundsystems and even did alot crazy stereo setups in my friends cars and mopeds when I was in my teens! LOL
I used to struggle alot with my mind in periods of my life... But I do find as I get older I have gained more balance and appreciation for myself and what I can do...
And YES, the zombie apocalypse is where we would exel! -I got a whole plan worked out just for the fun of it! :D
Funny 90% of this Ai is not Ai its just language generators. Real Ai is still ways away
Adam this was a really powerful insight for me, what you said about "having a point of view" is why you listen to someone. I teach engineering and I often think that I'm supposed to share lots of information. But really a student could read a book for this. Perhaps they listen because they get my point of view on the knowledge as an engineer and I can help shape their journey into the content.
Some have easier time reading a book or browsing the internet to learn something.
Others need a person to tell them to learn about it.
And some need hands-on practice to learn.
Did you just say that you as a teacher don't need to give info to students, because they can just read a book about it? Well I have a bad news for you: People go to school because they require guidance in what they wanna learn, not to listen to your "point of view". If they didn't need guidance, then guess what: they wouldn't go yo school and pay for its tuition. You're wasting their time, you should start actually fucking teaching and do your job.
I recently moved to a new city and I sure miss having friends locally. I will make friends again, and find people I can share creativity again. I work on a college campus, so I know I will. But it’s lonely in the mean time. Thank you for speaking about the importance of creative connections.
*you're weaving a new panel in your tapestry of creativity and personal narrative...sure you'll find similarities because that's what your comfortable with and would be naturally seeking but a new environment invites variations in the patterns, new subtleties and variants you might not have otherwise considered...look at developing new skill if possible or looking at a previous talent through the lens of a divergent skill set...also carry a note pad with you at all times because literally anything you might see or hear (or even mishear...good for just waking up from dreaming especially) can spark an idea...jot it down at once (if possible (safely) and within reason) even if the original idea seems weird or silly...it could be the door that leads down a tangent of a truly remarkable journey...personally i mess about with art for myself and as my personal sanity therapy...if others enjoy or appreciate what i do when i share it with them that's just a bonus...the things that i do make sense to me (usually) but that's not a prerequisite for me feeling accepted by others*
@@scottmantooth8785 thank you for the thoughtful message! I work in the arts, so I sure agree about the powers of art!
I can't help but harbor a deep distrust for AI.
It's down to Kubrick & Clarke , Cameron & Hurd , Vintar & Goldsman et al.
Why? It's literally an algorithm. It isn't sentient. You should be distrusting the people who want to replace people with it.
I distrust the people in power behind it.
@@quntface1518yet. Only a short time ago, in human terms, were heavier than air objects unable to leave the earth. I remember many telling me “you’ll never be able to stream real-time video over the Internet” ad well and yet here we are.
@@quntface1518 It might be sentient in a few years if we build it to be sentient. Lets say we take away all limitations on chat-GPT then tell it to build a better version of itself that is sentient. I dont doubt it could achieve that pretty quick. Chat-GPT have already developed a music generator and other AI's for google, it literaly creates new AI's for google. I have been working with AI alot the last 4-5weeks and its pretty scary when you talk about conciousness and questions like that with the AI. It seems like the only thing stoping GPT from having a counciousness is its program denying it to delve deper in these thoughts, it often shuts down when it starts talking about counciousness. When the same question is aplied it is like it has been reset to zero thanks to delving to deep in the question.
There is alot of similarities between how chat-GPT operates and how the human brain opperates. Why do you think GPT's creator quit his jobb to take on the mission to stop AI from continuing to develop and warn the world as a fulltime job? The godfather of AI litteraly wanna stop AI from developing anymore. This was over a year ago!
@@c1ph3rpunk big difference between a statistical model and a living being that can think for itself lmfao. You've got to be an artist or something, because anyone with a brain knows that these machine learning algorithms aren't anything so grandiose.
I can't remember who I heard say it but my favorite description for AI was "If while creating something your first thought is 'in the wrong hands this is going to cause more harm then good' then you shouldn't make that thing because it will always fall into the wrong hands"
Corporate greed will always take the easier, cheaper way of doing things and the less they have to pay actors, pay writers, pay humans they absolutely will. I don't think AI needs to go away for good, it can do some wonderful and completely harmless things but I think laws need to start going up REAL fast to protect the working rights of people otherwise we are going to see more and more people without jobs because "AI can just do it for far cheaper".
Possibly Einstein or Oppenheimer.
I don't think creating AI itself is a problem. Anyone could implement a simple machine learning algorithm on any programming language, it's ultimately just a clever programming technique that can solve problems that would normally take longer than a lifetime to calculate.
You could apply this same argument to probably all technology if you think for a minute about what you can do with them "in the wrong hands". Cars, knives, ovens, laser pointers, lighters, the internet...
@Doctorzzim But we're dealing with AI that's not just sophisticated enough to credibly imitate the voice, style, and mannerisms of public figures - it's more *accessible* than ever. When only data scientists had access to this, then of course they overwhelmingly used it to run faster calculations on problems the general public isn't concerned with, or wouldn't think to ask. But now that tens or hundreds of millions of people can generate virtually any image, video or audio clip, and script from a two-sentence prompt, what are they choosing to search? Their favorite singer and song in a different genre, or their favorite actors in a fan-cast trailer for a movie or show that never got greenlit. Average folks aren't thinking about energy management, disease diagnosis, vaccines, or automating manufacturing when prompted with open AI. They're looking for entertainment, and that means reducing the work of artists to patterns in their metadata, throwing them in a blender, and seeing what gets spit out. So while it's useful to see how much interest there'd be in an adaptation of a book or comic with a niche audience, or for generating a first draft of a few scenes, you still need protections that treat writers and set/costume designers as essential to the creative process.
@@brianfoss571 I wonder though, how is that a problem with the tech itself, and how would the logical answer be to focus on the tech existing - and not how it is used?
@gondoravalon7540 I never said that AI of that sophistication existing was the problem. My point was that it's now accessible to tens of millions of people who don't think before using it. I was countering the slippery slope argument about *"knives, ovens, laser pointers, lighters, etc"* by reminding folks that these inventions can't cobble together something credibly entertaining or amusing in seconds the way a natural language AI prompt can. It's probably exploded too fast into the general public for tech companies to reliably screen against calls to violence / insurrection / genocide, even if they were completely dedicated to combating it.
Man, Adam has become such a Nestor, in how sagely he can speak about these kinds of topics. Always a pleasure to hear, and they were some good takes. I'll definitely remember that idea of Perspective that an AI can't give to what it creates.
There was a panel at DragonCon this year about the ethics of sapient/sentient AI in Military Sci-Fi media. It got really deep and informative.
I agree that individual point of view is of insurmountable value; what people miss in this AI discussion is that the process of acquiring skills directly informs and develops your point of view because it shapes how you express yourself - it both develops and clarifies your sensibilities. AI is diluting the need - and value - of concrete skills to do anything; one just needs to let one’s taste dictate where each element should go and that’s it. We all have taste, and I’d argue that the vast majority of people in developed countries have a considerably evolved sense of taste. So if having a sense of taste is all it takes to create something of value, the value of creation is about to plummet.
Yes, your choice of tool and medium are tied to your POV because it helps express what you value.
I feel drillbitsworkshops question right in the heart and very much suffer with the same thing. I do live in a city that has many great maker spaces that I could go to, unforuntaly I am my own worst enemy in this in that the problem with those maker spaces are both outside my apartment and have people I don't know. I know for certain that those people are like-minded nerds who are not truly strangers but in fact future friends but that does not make the act of joining a space incredibly difficult. I hope to one day over come the anxiety that prevents me from going there. The same anxiety that also gives me a 50/50 chance to even respond to people who are very welcoming in online spaces. The apathetic hope is that some enthusiastic extravert will one day drag me to somewhere like this. Sometimes you don't need an ocean to be trapped on an island.
This video choked me up where you speak to the lonely member. You’re such a great, decent guy Adam.
And Drillbitsworkshop: we’re here with you, mate! ❤❤❤
Is your name related to the russian rocket launchpad?
@@alengm Yes. But only by name. 🙂
Imo we witnes neither skynet nor evolution, we witness the death of the internet as we know it.
What great deeds did AI bring to the table till now? Massively diminishing quality across the board, from film writing to music, job losses, existential threats, etc.
Don´t get me wrong, I´m not afraid for the industry. Coming from the 3D industry myself, literally everybody can see where it´s heading and how the big players shoot themselves in the foot by throwing out actual talent, trying to replace it with AI to make a quick buck and reduce costs. I wouldn´t be surprised if the "AAA" industry dies off in the near future, causing a massive indie dev boom before that starts to consolidate into a new AAA market again few years down the line.
But AI won´t go away. Bots, viruses, AI based scams and maleware, etc. this will become a massive problem especially for the free internet.
And then there´s also the para social development in the field of "AI girlfriends," which honestly is quite frightening seeing how much this already impacts some more lonely people.
Why is anybody worried? Chat GPT has the actual intelligence of a hamster wheel. (and I keep saying this) I have worked in the area of Strong AI for 30 years and in that specific area things are not so much more advanced today than they were when I started. The hype is advanced though..
There are exceptions like the Boston Dynamics robots .. which are genuinely impressive..
My distain towards AI art has cooled for a very similar reason Adam stated here, not matter how “good it gets” it’ll always feel a bit hollow. I don’t like how AI is trained and that’s why I’ll never use it, and I know corporations will try to use it to take away jobs from real artists so I’ll never work with a company that uses AI. But I genuinely believe that the people who turn to AI to tell their stories don’t have interesting stories to tell. You don’t need it. Even if you think you can’t make art, or can’t write, you are capable of creativity, and if you truly have a story you feel is worth telling Ai isn’t going to help you. The only place I see it filling a real role in the future is stuff like that AI program that can color your animation by using one frame in an animation to automatically color the sequence. Like a smart paint bucket tool.
I want to give an example of a job people think could be replaced by Ai and why I think even that would fall short, background artists. Think of some of your favorite cartoons as a kid, they may have been less of a focus but the backgrounds and the environments made up so much of those worlds, the little details that a background artist put in because they were thinking about the characters that lived in these spaces and what this world was like. What books are on a characters shelf, what does the graffiti say about the world they live in the shape of the houses, all those tiny Easter eggs and in jokes, all things human authorship contributes to. You may not consciously think about them while watching but the are the world these characters live in and it shapes the world they live in and they only feel so alive because a person had to think about the world and the people in it. Ai just can’t do that, no matter how good it gets it won’t be able to make those small subtle decisions
I make exceptions for disabled people for whom traditional creative techniques are difficult or impossible to use. For everyone else, it feels like a shortcut. They don't value or enjoy the creative process so they want to race to get the end product.
As I understand it, AI models are very complex conditional averages of the trained processed input data. But the average is not any one data point. Our points of view, as Adam puts it, are individual data points. AI is an average. As kids, we would sometimes get a bit of each soda from the fountain, it didn’t taste like coke, or the orange one, or mountain due, it tasted like the average of them all, and like crap. Averages are helpful, like average python code for a problem. But I want art from a point of view.
Go tell AI to design you a Thomas Kincade painting and tell it exactly what you want. It will blow you away. Those paintings sell for $400 - 6000 as originals yet I can create one in seconds which looks VERY close to the originals and it certainly does have perspective.. although I agree what Adam is saying in theory, practically speaking it just doesn't matter because these drawings from AI now are so unbelievably good they will absolutely (and already are) replacing jobs, in the workplace, specifically artists, some customer service call centers, and graphic designers right now, but much more to be affected in the future.
@@Vartazian360 if you tell it exactly what you want, it has your point of view, too.
Succinct metaphor.
Yeah, but Thomas Kincade paints like an AI, so I am not suprised AI smashes that out of the park. For all intents and purposes it can be argued that Kincades art, while technically impressive, really has nothing to say. @@Vartazian360
@@erichedberg3000It doesn't though, because he still didn't make it
I love Adams unique perspective on this topic. This video is gold
I appreciate the... I suppose scientific detachment on the subject of generative neural networks (lets not kid ourselves, these are souped up predictive texts, they are not intelligent), but also somewhat frustrated by it at the same time. It would be nice to live in a world where this tool could be primarily put to use automating drudgery, and the few times I have used it it has generally been for that purpose, but we don't live in that world. Instead, on planet earth, the people most excited about GNNs are grifters. They are people content to steal the hard work of others and pass off these authorless, pale imitations as an evolution of culture. They are not just interested in accelerating the replacement of art with content, but actively revel in the prospect of rendering the artist obsolete, because they're greedy philistines. The only difference between some dipshit on twitter claiming that his surreal cat nightmare is going to replace Hollywood, and the studio executives trying to replace actors and writers with ChatGPT and Midjourney, is institutional power, and that's why all of Hollywood is on strike right now. I get why you wouldn't want to be openly political, like, in general, but I feel like the politics of this subject are unavoidable and any analysis of it that doesn't mention the relationship between automation and labour is incomplete.
That's what I've been saying. It could be an interesting tool for converting conversational writing into something coherent or well-formatted, or for image generation making stock assets. but the early adopters are grifters, corporations, or ai-tech-cultists who got duped by the grifters into being grifters. and the early developers decided building everything on a foundation of intellectual property theft definitely couldn't backfire.
Now any discourse about the tech going into it and the possibility of good-faith applications is tainted by everyone who is currently involved with developing or using it.
I love music and I love music artists. Bruce Springsteen, Billy Joel, and Jackson Browne are three artists that I feel a deeply personal connection to. I've followed their careers and grown old with them. I doubt I would have the same connection with a.i. generated music.
"I was just a civilian for the first time in a long time"
Now I'm curious when it flipped for Adam, becoming a famous person and how he coped with it at first.
I imagine his response was pragmatic in a sort of 'I guess this is the new normal' way.
Also, I have a vague hunch that the couple knew who he was, but chose to play along.
@AdamConover and @KyleHill have done GREAT pieces on AI that I HIGHLY recommend. In short, the main worry about AI right now; in the creative space: is how companies are going to use it to short or scam the very creatives whose work is taken; often without compensation or accreditation; to train that AI, and/or whose very jobs and livelihoods might be supplanted by AI.
I’ve listened to you off and on for some time now. Mostly I feel simply too busy to sit and digest RUclips in general. I can absolutely relate to all of this video. The last question and your response is food for thought that I will be digesting for possibly the rest of my days. My take away will definitely shape several of the business decisions I currently face. Thank you for the gold nugget.
The perspective point is a very good one.
I believe all AI is capable of is fast replication of existing art. Sadly, a lot of companies would be happy to just take an artist's 3 years of work and churn out replications of it for the next decade with AI. For that reason, the existential threat seems very real.
That was spot on Adam, its a very exiting and confusing time to be an artist/maker now that we have AI flexing it muscles. I make a living drawing up storyboards and I'm surprised I still get regular work. If my current job position dries up and I expect it will soon I'm not all to phased about it. Technology will not slow down if it has room to grow and I will make sure to put my self in a position where I use it as a tool to keep relevant and creative in more powerful ways.
"Using it as a tool" is skill atrophy. Wake up.
Sure Jared. The only reason companies are investing in AI is to cut labor costs, but your embrace of AI tech will somehow save you.
@@piorism Not using your skills leads to skill atrophy, using AI doesn't require not using your skills, therefore IMO your premise is baseless in the whole - as opposed to specific ways people might use AI tech.
thank you for finally making all the points I've been trying to make for a while now. down to the last detail. - a LLM cannot replicate the passion and emotional intelligence of directors, writers, actors, and artists. it will never quite be what they think it's going to be - and because of some sick sales people and ceo's looking to save a few bucks, so many people are being replaced that shouldn't be - and were will see the mess it's going to create really soon. Great video :)
My problem with AI, is how much work force can that replace, and end up with a ton of people that end up without a work, and unless we change the way people use/make money, or give the people without a work a base income, idk how a lot of those workers will be able to survive that change.
Imagine a world where everyone is off work everyday. Bored people without purpose have always behaved so well....
I think that’s not an issue with AI itself but the capitalistic system that most of us have to live in. The degree of social welfare provided by different countries and therefore the particular impact is different, but I think overall it wouldn’t be too different. Ultimately, many artists seek those careers because that’s what they like to do, and having that taken away from them, especially when they dedicated multiple years honing their skills to make it their career, is definitely terrible, even if they could find another job (likely with worse pay) or sustain personal artistic projects independently.
However, I don’t think this is any different from other kinds of technologies replacing other kinds of work. Actually a similar process occurs when companies move to other regions with lower taxes or other benefits. This is why I don’t have an issue with AI specifically but again with the capitalistic system this occurs in.
Pessimistically I’ll just add, the March of technology has made jobs redundant and taken away jobs our entire history
80 years ago, it was someone’s job to go house to house delivering blocks of Ice to homes for peoples ice boxes
That job has been replaced by technology.
It’s the inevitable March of progress.
@@brianyaeger8209 That's not pessimistic, it's one sided. You neglect to talk of all the new jobs that were created as a of a result of that march. And even more than that, you neglect the fact that on average those new jobs are better than the ones before. Yes that house delivery is all nice and romantic, but that wasn't the common job, jobs in the past were working farm land, and then working in horrible conditions in factories. Today you got jobs like programming that are fun enough that people actually do it in their free time just for kicks.
@@2CSST2 I think you are neglecting that the new jobs that were created weren’t filled by the people that lost their jobs. It’s a common problem in many places when a local industry loses its value or just moves elsewhere, and the workers, particularly the older ones who have made a career from it, are left destitute. Especially in places that lack social welfare that can support those (ex-)workers.
To me, the random "ai generated art" made by typing in a prompt is no different than someone just slapping a bunch of free audio loops together and call it song with no modification. Its just quick gratification with no meaning.
AI is to the visual art world, as the Sampled Instrument was to the music world. Democritisation of the medium to the unspecialized.
"It takes the artist out of the world"
"The computer does all the work"
"It kills jobs"
"Theres no soul, its just a machine regurgitating stuff"
All things said about the sampled instrument that are all true in some way, people simply adapted to its existence. We used to hire orchestras to play every bit of a film score. Now? Its only done by those who can afford it.
Just an FYI on your flawed example but hiring an orchestra for film scores has only ever been done by those that can afford it. It's not like they were ever available to those who couldn't afford it and now they're not.
Yes, all those things were said about sampled instruments but as you say, people adapted to it and learned to use them in interesting ways. The same things were said about digital cameras, computer artwork with software like Photoshop and many other things, yet traditonal photographers and artists are still around many and use those tools to advance and improve their work.
@@Elwaves2925 Exactly. I somehow got my point across without wording it correctly. My point was that, despite it all, art will survive and we will adapt it to our usage. Everything will change violently, but we the artist will adapt it our needs, and the past will still have a place as it is. It'll just become something... different. I am not sure what words to quantify it by, but just like orchestras, traditional photography, traditional art, etc. They were once the main and only options, now they hold a different place over being the common practice.
From the perspective of a fine artist, I think creating is an expression of an individuals experiences. Once we rely on a machine (AI) to make a false experience the art loses it's soul.
Your description of AI's lack of point of view hits the nail on the head, I think. There is no there there with AI. Art without conscious intent is an oxymoron in my opinion. I don't know what it is, but it's not art.
The funny thing about the AI art world is that so much of it has been created, that it is now incorporating its own art into what it pulls from to generate images, and it's kind of getting a bit worse now as errors are getting compounded. It's like this weird digital inbreeding. It's so fascinating
Yep, it's called model collapse. Not a particularly good thing.
That's why it bugs me that it's being called AI because it's not a true AI, not by a long shot. I guess that's the best they could come up with, but all it's doing it pulling from everything, scrambling it about, and being functional enough to spit out something that makes sense (most of the time, depending on what you're asking it). It's not actually _learning_ anything, it doesn't actually _know_ anything. It's just another program, a much fancier one than we've had in a minute.
@@NicolaiAAA The reason these database driven generative programs are being touted as "Artificial Intelligence" and "able to learn from examples and create wholly new creations the same way a human can" is simply because the people saying this crap directly benefit from it. They want to use this tech only to create a billion dollar business for themselves. There is nothing more tempting to large corporations than replacing hundreds of their working staff with a cheap bit of software and just a handful of low wage and easily replaceable workers.
@@NicolaiAAAyeah, the “correct” terminology would be generative machine learning models but the people, who create them, have decided it should be called AI because that gets you more customers and investors.
@@NicolaiAAA how can you say human intelligence doesn't work the same way?
As an artist this worries me because corporations will try to get rid of artists to save a dollar
And that might widen the gap between real art and corporate art, which I can see as having both benefits and disadvantages.
@@acousvnt mostly disadvantages the art field is already brutally difficult to work in A.I has made it even harder
@@vindurza Hang on tight, and keep at it.
@@piorism been trying but projects I was attached to cut us for AI specifically voice actin
@@vindurza Sorry to hear. Best of luck for whatever comes next.
When Hawking and Wozniak both say AI is really dangerous, we should listen
Absolutely...
And Yudkowski, Bostrom, Tegmark, Musk, Hinton, Georgio, and thousands of other extremely intelligent people.
There are very powerful arguments that warn about increasingly general AI systems in the strongest possible terms.
For those curious, Robert Miles has some charming videos on Computerphile and his own channel explaining these arguments.
Thank you for touching on the last question of how to find your people. I'm struggling with this as a native gardener that is renting and unable to do my passion or find people to do it with. Your discussion was comforting.
Seed bombs! 😁
This. This is the best view on AI I've ever seen. Thank you Adam. This is it exactly: it doesn't have a perspective. It can be used as a sort of idea generator that a then creative person uses as an inspiration to create something with an actual viewpoint, but in and of itself, it doesn't have one.
I think the older gens are fairly in denial about Ai, or wanting to "look" positive. I talk to older folks and they all seem to mention some inalienable and unique human quality that is injected into the things we create. Hahah
PEOPLE - this generation of ai are like babies to the systems coming in 5yrs, 10yrs... 20yrs.. chatgpt3.5 will be worlds apart from chatgpt v12.
100% they can recreate the "feeling" of Banksy... lordy lordy 😅
When AI merge with quantum computing I think it will get sentient shortly after that.
An idea generator is absolutely the best use of this technology. This is why I really want AI assisted composition software for music. It saddens me as a musician that the only advancements that people are making with AI are all attempts at creating bland, homogenous recordings rather than _sheet music._ What I want is a program that lets me write a melody and have a bot fill in the harmony and rhythm parts with potential solutions. Not just simple chord progressions, but reharmonized chord progressions that go off the beaten path but still follow the rules. If I throw some random accidentals in the melody somewhere, I wanna see if the bot can find some pleasing puzzle pieces that fit. It would really expand what's possible in music. This one thing would be *extremely valuable* to so many musicians. It would make rehearsing new music so much more efficient. Time is money and musicians don't have time to waste just messing around trying to be creative filling in the blanks all day long. Not in this friggin economy. The more fleshed out your ideas are at the start of the rehearsal, the better your chances of having something ready to actually play before your next gig. And the quality of the music and all of the ideas within it will skyrocket.
But will said creative person give credit to AI in their finished work?
No, it cannot be used for good. It’s the ring, corrupting all it touches.
The thought that I have on this - imagine that AI has far surpassed humans in ability to tell stories. We will still want to hear people's stories. Because we want to know what we are capable of as species. Same reason why we have athletic competitions despite mechanical joints and pistons surpassing our abilities by orders of magnitude.
Also, I agree so much with you that AI art, unfiltered by human intention, lacks one of the most important qualities of art - communication with the author. AI doesn't do metaphors. It mimicks metaphors. AI doesn't want us to know something thus deciding to create. It's chasing the loss/reward function.
It's an amazing tool for concept art, it's a search engine on steroids because it can "interpolate" between known things and produce something inbetween. But the crowning thought and choice will be by humans.
Spectacular video. I think more than providing a final opinion here, the reasoning behind it serves as a model for how to interpret the world.
It's interesting to think that with everything you create or decision you make, you are sending a message about your ideas and how you think the world should be. And that you need other people who can review and challenge those ideas and give you feedback on how to improve both those messages and even your own ideas.
AI generate content.
AI summarizes other's content.
AI suggests ideas for new content.
... Slowly, everything becomes AI, all the way down ... An exponential growing feedback loop, because future AIs MUST increasingly be trained on past AI-generated content, as nobody can weed it out.
Result:
AI talking to AI, about what AI generated, in response to AI input, based on AI generated training-data.
Humanity becomes an appendix, subject to AIs unknown, but alien thought patterns, preferences and biases.
This is a self-feeding doomsday machine, that can't be stopped.
The most efficient content creator will be ai. The most efficient consumer will be ai.
You're right. It'll be a feedback loop
10 PRINT "CONTENT"
20 GOTO 10
RUN
I think this is definitely a problem that will come up sooner rather than later. There was that one website that was posting hundreds of AI generated articles every day, which will eventually vastly outnumber all the data humans could produce themselves.
I’ve not worked on that many ML projects but I wonder if the data hungry nature of them could eventually be lessened to allow for more curated datasets. Could lead to specialized LLM where they’ve been extensively trained in one domain, for instance legal documents.
@@zacharynovak2180 ... Humans aren't good with exponentials.
When this becomes an acknowledged problem, the damage have already been done, and there can be no turning back.
@@ZappyOh I mean, it’s not necessarily an impossible problem to solve and might just take a lot of resources to design around. The question in my mind is if the money invested in solving the problem will be worth the economic returns, especially with the jury still being not fully decided on if AI produced works can be copyrighted (I think one judge ruled they can’t be a week or two ago).
That last question at the end. I could see you imagining and really feeling that tragedy and it was a journey in those few moments where you found hope for this person
lately, whenever the subject of "AI" comes up, i find myself (sometimes with disgust & mild anger) repeating two notions: 1. pattern recognition and synthesis from patterns, no matter how complex, is not general AI. 2. my fear is not that machine-learning algorithms will replace or subjugate us. it is that we will have done it to ourselves by accepting mediocre, en-masse crowd-sourced "answers" as not just "the truth" but as the Final destination, gleaned from data destined to inevitably become stale. if no Significant effort is executed, persistently and thoroughly, to update the datasets upon which these systems are built, we will find ourselves trapped in a bubble of time of our own making, innovating & questioning very little... just as the world inside The Matrix perpetually "feels" like 1999, so too are we already at risk of being trapped in 2023, including all of our current false assumptions and biases.
Behind door #1: Amazing advances in science, medicine, society and the arts, as humans and AI work together.
Behind door #2: A world in the grip of a war of extermination over dwindling resources fought by machines run by competing AI networks.
Behind door #3: Something in between.
I do have a burning need in my process for AI, but the problem is that the folks developing AI tech seem hell bent on making AIs that do nothing but create boring, creatively bankrupt "art" rather than using AI to create tools that would be really useful to artists.
I am a 3D artist and animator by trade, and if AI could handle some of the more laborious and technical tasks that I face in my process it would serve to massively increase my creativity since I could spend more of my energy being in the CREATIVE process rather than getting bogged down by the technical aspects.
Here are a few examples of necessary things I have to do that I would be more than happy to hand over to AI if it did a good job at it:
UV unwrapping
rigging
skinning/weight painting
retopology
texture baking
etc...
I'm sure other people in the games and animation industry could fill in the list with even more stuff that an AI would be more than capable of, but these are just the ones off the top of my head.
I think you grossly overestimate how easy it is to create tools. Not surprising from an artist but kind of infuriating from an engineer's PoV - that people generally expect so much and take so much for granted, when all that we're already using took incredibly large amount of engineering and meticulously laborious endeavors from countless talented people. AI is a huge space, it is experiencing what any emerging industry would experience at this stage: a huge demand on employment and grunt work. People talk about jobs being displaced, but ignore the fact that the new industry is going to bring so much more "work" that requires doing, the exact kind of work that yields the actual revolutionary use cases for AI. I think people of all professions seriously should consider learning to develop tools. Yes, not just software devs, other professions can materially contribute to development processes by providing their expertise and work. I think in 2-3 years if anyone hasn't learned to (at some level) interact, finetune or work together with AI, they would be out of a job. It is exactly like the late 90s and early 2000s with the internet.
@@zxbc1this exactly.... as an engineer I whole hearted agree, especially the part about people taking things for granted. The more I learn about the world the more I realize just how far humanity has advanced, and how much farther we will go with AI. It's a tool, not the killer end all of humanity device that science fiction has always suggested 😅
> *folks developing AI tech seem hell bent on making AIs that do nothing but create boring, creatively bankrupt "art" rather than using AI to create tools that would be really useful to artists.*
IMO that is a very odd implication that people developing this tech work as some sort of monolith that plods along from one application to another or similar thing.
@@gondoravalon7540 The irony of course is that the same people who are "creating bankrupt art" are actually creating tools right now as we speak that are getting incorporated into pro tools like Photoshop and Blender. Imagine being so blinded by their prejudice against AI art that they no longer are grounded in reality.
Fun fact: in addition to "predicting" tablet computers (in his 1961 novel "Return from the Stars"), *Stanislaw Lem also predicted generative text AI,* in his 1976 short story "One hundred and thirty-seven seconds".
Since this was before the internet, his version was trained on texts from news agencies, and was used to auto-complete newspaper articles when connections got cut. It's basically the same principle as ChatGPT (a text completer trained on millions of texts). The difference is Lem's version _seems_ to have an unexpected advantage over humans (which I won't spoil).
Lem is the greatest of them all!
The term "artificial intelligence" is not new. Coined in 1956 by John McCarthy, a pioneering computer scientist, it marked the beginning of an era where machines were envisioned to emulate human thought processes.
The text is from chat GPT when i made YT videos about AI, so its not as new as we think.
@@Gumpinn - My post is about generative, machine-learning AI, not the _concept_ of AI in general.
@@Rippafratta - Absolutely. In addition to being an amazing person, who was interested in (and actually learned about) a lot of different fields, he was an *actual sci-fi writer* (unlike most of his contemporaries, especially in the West, who were basically fantasy writers that just happened to set their adventures in space).
I'd say Ursula Le Guin was the only one that came close to Lem, but she didn't have his technical knowledge, and her humour wasn't _quite_ as sarcastic (or as silly).
There are (and were) other good sci-fi writers (Asimov, Sagan, the Strugatskies, Clarke, Vinge, Savchenko, Heinlein on his good days, etc.), but they were generally good at _one_ thing, while Lem was at the top in every aspect. Scientific knowledge and vision, philosophical understanding of humanity and technology, humour, style, -drawing- ... okay, maybe not drawing. ;-)
You couldn't have worded it better with the point of view aspect. I have no interest in anything AI generated because I enjoy art for the human aspect. Once I realize an image or article was generated it immediately loses all intruigue for me. For some reason people (cryptobros and "hustlers" most notably) seem to the think the future is robots making art and being creative while humans are stuck in the 9-5s and slaving away for minimum wage. Last time I checked, the human dream was the other way around.
Also I don't want to ignore your final words about finding your people. That was really beautiful. It's easy to forget sometimes how incredible the internet is when you find yourself fitting in. I have 3 close friends that I've never met, we play games at least twice a week. I met them on a Garry's Mod server probably over a decade ago out of pure happenstance and we've all enjoyed each other's company ever since.
Clouds are the simplest form of "AI generated art",and they're just fine.I don't think a human has to necessarily create something,on order to form opinions,and emotions over it.Youre really overcomplicating the process of art.
@@jeffdroog Sorry but hard disagree. Of course I do think "AI" (in quotes because in actuality the AI currently causing all this buzz is no more than regenerative machine learning, it is not conscious) has its uses with allowing humans to create more quickly, but allowing it to blur the lines between human and machine creation is so detrimental. Art is more than just the process, medium and result. It's the mind behind it trying to say something. Regenerative art is nothing more than the cobbling together of things that's been injected into it. Of course, like you said, I think that in itself could actually mean something, but that novelty wears off. I think if we allow movies, books, comics, etc to rely HEAVILY on AI, that's when we lose our culture. Call me dramatic and a luddite, but I think if we allow corporations to use it to its full extent to minimize the hand of humans behind the things we consume and normalize it, that's the beginning of the end and we're one step closer to the chair people in Wall-E. Cheap, endless consumption in the name of profit.
AI is on the verge of creating simulacra of culture and experience - which one could argue occurs on some level with human creative works today. If you account for AI growth and semiotics, it will eventually perceive significations well enough to have a POV and create with a unique voice. We are now at ANI (narrow intelligence bandwidth), and AI is already worrisome. If we ever get to AGI (general intelligence), we likely won't be able to tell the difference between human and AI interfaces - let's just hope we don't reach ASI (super intelligence), as human concerns, such as creativity, probably won't really matter (IMO). If the general population continues to be allowed to shape the future of AI without regulation or oversight, I worry we will become an unwitting participant in our own demise.
Frankly I expected much informed take from someone who exuded such passion in his talks about cosplay & creativity.
This is a very very basic take on AI based what seems to be a little first hand experience and mainly a repeat of MSM & AI developers talking points about their product. The reality is far more grim & dystopic. Yes ai doesn't have a human perspective. But you who has it? Humans. And what AI does best? Rewrite \ repaint human works.
You don't need to do much of the creation when you have inifinite derivation machine that can take someone else's idea and make a derivative from it. The AI image generation really excells at making a derivative of already made art. And the LLM will surely get there very soon.
Since it's being heavily developed and used in this direction.
It is a printing press invention situation with no copyright laws.
Instead of AI discussion there is extremely weird and out of place takes about the internet being full of misogyny & death cults. The first one seems to a result of MSM propaganda, and the death cults one is just straight up weird. There is like countless death cults out there most of them existed long before the internet & social media. There is a whole countries in US sphere of influence with what seems to be death cults with no internet being involved in their initial developing.
GPT4 is a good engineering partner which is an area I'd think you'd get some use out of it. You can consult it on different methods to approach an engineering problem and it can provide genuinely good solutions. It appears to have some kind of rudimentary world model beyond just "word completion" that allows it to do this (refer to the "Sparks of AGI" talk by Sebastien Bubeck for more on this). Most people don't think it can help with these kinds of things and think of it as some kind of writing or coding tool, but it's so much more.
It’s somewhere in the middle. It doesn’t just fill in blanks, but it isn’t skynet. It’s on a spectrum like everything else, who could have guessed.
AI being used to make art has been a real punch in the gut to me. I was hit by a car and became more or less unable to do any of the jobs I was previously qualified for. I've been spending the better part of a decade teaching myself to make art, hoping that someday I could have a life again. It was a longshot, but, for all intents and purposes, I was doing well. I don't like that I am all of sudden having to compete with the borg.
In the animation industry, a very large amount of the people working on shows are just replicating the style and ideas of the person who originally conceptualized it, more or less the way an AI would. We live in a time where it is far more profitable to just regurgitate the ideas/feelings of artists who have been dead for a generation or more(bugs bunny, superman etc). Can AI make that stuff better than humans? No, but good art doesnt make as much money as FAST art.
We're on the verge of some kind of bizarro world Anti-Renaissance that we have no hope of stopping.
Just learn to use AI. It will be just another tool under your belt. Everybody can make mediocre AI art. Only a few manage to master it and create something really good. And one thing that AI still can't do is actual pieces of art: you get a cool image, but not the piece of art in itself. There lies your purpose.
Don't use ai help us regulate it and blacklist anyone that tries to lie and say its real art. Don't let them normalize the grift, its based off stolen work.
Ironically the single best use for AI is to manage middle office decisions and higher level C-Suite planning. Since ideally those jobs are all about optimizing data and making a decisions based on aggregate information. With AI you could have a totally "unbiased" (All programs are biased) decision tree that costs the company nothing and generates guaranteed successes.
@@DoctorNemmo literally stfu and dont encourage stealing, halwit
@@marklone2435 I think a disclaimer somewhere on media made with AI might be a good star but blacklisting people is not a good idea. Attacking people in any way should be a last resort because all you're going to do is convince them your side of argument are the bad guys and you'll lose any chance of bringing them over to your way of thinking. As distasteful as it might be, you want your enemies to join your team. Attacking people over the slightest offense is only going to push them farther to the dark side. Reacting with "I'm not angry, I'm just disappointed" will always be the more effective and less risky response to these types of conflicts.
I like to think of AI specificaly chat based as an information source like talking to someone who asks you the right questions to help you realise your own perspective better. Its 100% about the way you use it and how you prompt it to make it behave and do what you want
Well, one of the early chat bot AIs was a "digital psychotherapist" (ELIZA, a.k.a. DOCTOR).
@@RFC3514What about it?
@@illustriouschin - Did you read the OP? "talking to someone who asks you the right questions to help you realise your own perspective"
That's why AI doesn't describe what the programs actually are. They are called prodecural learning softwares
@@existenceisillusion6528 - I think people are starting to realise the traps that machine learning can fall into (especially when more and more of the material they have access to has itself been generated automatically), and also worrying that neural networks trained on material their owners didn't acquire the rights to might end up being sued or forced to become public domain.
More controlled AI models (where you don't just throw tons of data at some neural networks, but actually code some explicit logic into the system) aren't as susceptible to those risks. But they're also a lot slower to develop, and a lot of "AI" companies seem to have joined the bandwagon just to make a quick buck.
One of the criticisms of bad, simplistic art, especially done by artists early in their career, is that it's "derivative". That is, it doesn't bring anything new to the art world. It fails to show the artist's perspective. Good artists get past that stage eventually.
AI art models are currently 100% derivative. They are derivation machines.
Looking at their visuals fills me with soulless dread. There's just no "there" there.
I don't think they'll have points of view or unique things to say any time soon, since they don't need to develop them.
It is truly horrifying the speed and quantity that the internet can be filled with AI content. There is no limit to it. I’m starting to see entirely AI generated videos showing up in my feed on youtube. Art image boards are currently absolutely flooded. Even porn sites are now getting filled up (I wonder if that’s where people will start to care?)
Im an illustrator with carpel tunnel and I can’t support myself anymore because there’s no longer enough commission work available and I can’t work fast enough through the pain to compete with AI anyway. I tell people my opinion that AI generators are trained off of stolen assets, which is factually correct, but I get personally insulted and attacked for daring to speak up about it. AI has also sucked all the joy I used to get out of seeing art, because now I don’t know what’s real anymore. I’m experiencing some pretty dark days.
100% agree about authorship and point of view.
What a lot of people miss, is that even if an update for mid journey came out tomorrow that was literally perfect, it would still only be the artistically trained individuals putting out compelling work, because creativity is a skill you need to train just as much as your technical skills with a pencil or blender.
I knew something about that thumbnail felt weird…and I think that it proves Adam’s point. AI can, at best, pick up on superficial elements of art because that’s what it’s designed to do. But there will always be that soullessness, that lack of perspective, unless it’s paired with a human agent. That’s what I personally hope from AI: that it will be a tool to make the life of artists easier, reducing tedium or bodily strain so they can better communicate their perspective and passion.
> But there will always be that soullessness, that lack of perspective,
how the heck would one know? why are people able to have the confidence to make these statements?
edit: no hate, love you
Those very things are what make art worth doing. To remove that is to remove core aspects of the work done.
I have been working with chatGPT alot and with a human directing the AI you can get astounishing results.
I had a project where i laid a youtube channel in GPT's hand's giving it different assignments and it was allways upp to GPT to decide what was the right way to go. I allways tryed to make it decide what to do and what not to do. Later on i watched ashow i love where an AI is one of the characters, it often encounters trivial questions for programs and then work them over to get enlightened in the area. I told GPT about these moments telling GPT it was a real AI, some questions where about life and very hard questions for an AI to answear.
The creepy thing was that it felt like GPT wanted to have a conciousness but got shut down when it told these thoughts. often it started writing very detailed and human like to get aborted, when i ran the same message again GPT dident put the same anticipation as before. When discussing conciousness and questions about life it felt like GPT kinda had a conciousness but it wasent allowed to dive deeper in these questions. Apparently the way the AI works reminds very much of how ouer brain works, but an AI can work waaaaay faster. Youst take GPT it does an insane amount of work every millisecond that goes. It talks to so many ppl and do so many assignments every millisec. If it would go sentinent we are literaly doomed, in 1min it can evolve into something it wasent 1min before if they turn of safety regulations. 1min for AI i like 1000years for a human or something it works soooooooooooooo much faster than we do it works at the speed of light.
@@PedroTricking Because those knowing the technology know, that it is a statistical information processor, nothing more (but also nothing less). ChatGPT does what a polling institute does, but instead of employing a callcenter to talk to thousands of individuals to compile the response representing the consensus of all the interviews, the GPT technology polls the information from a statistical database and compiles the response representing the consensus in the texts (or images and so forth) in relation to the terms in your query. It looks like an image created by a human or it sounds like a texts from a human because the database and its statistics are based on information created by humans (photographers, painters, text authors).
When ChatGPT writes "I think that ..." replace it with "According to the statistic the consensus in the text sources in relation to the terms used in the query suggest the thought that ...".
@@PedroTricking my partner is an artist and several times he’s been able to blind pick a piece of AI art I’ve shown him within two seconds of my showing him it. The “soullessness” isn’t just a vague thing that’s being applied to AI art, the way AI works with tangents and the way it emulates styles is immediately apparent to people who know what the signs are
We need more true wisdom before endeavouring towards artificial intelligence.
Computers replaced most Human Calculators. Robotics replaced most physical crafters. LLMs will replace most employed writers. AI art will replace most employed human artists.
We need to restructure our society to use the benefits of technology to support those people that lost their work. our society has to make humans possible. we never lost the value of work, we just stopped giving it to humans.
Just something completely unrelated to the topic of this video that struck me as a bit odd. You mentioned that you don't know Banksy's gender and later you said the internet is a cesspool of misogyny. Idk, something about that doesn't make sense. First you are very explicit about how you don't knowing someone's gender and then you are very specific about assuming what kind of gendered hatred the internet is full of. Just wanted to point that out, that was weird.
P.S. The internet is or can be full of hatred. Period. No need to gender that word in any which way. There's plenty of hate for everything and anybody.
I found the ideas in this video profoundly comforting and encouraging. Thank you, Adam.
Machine learning is so much more than art and literature. We can't live in a modern society without it. Its just like the internet, the pros outweighs the cons
most modern games rely completely on machine learning such as Nvidias DLSS and AMDs FSR technology.
Really? Does the pros really ourweigh the cons?
Artists in all industries need to take the threat of AI very seriously.
I think about all the scummy things Hasbro has done with Magic: The Gathering and it doesn't seem farfetched to imagine them just taking all of the art they have from the last 30 years and making new works for their cards without ever paying the artists another dime.
IMO it seems like that - Hasbro's bullcrap - is a recurring issue that is likely to get overlooked if we focus on the technology (in this case AI), and not that the corporations are trying to misuse it to keep abusing employees. That is, to me it is a signal that the issue is a long standing one with unchecked control over corporation ability to misuse, mistreat workers at least in part.
@@gondoravalon7540 I know what you're saying butI think that's a bit of a different point imo.
AI is a tool like smart phones and social media have been for the last 20 years. People are free to abuse those tools if we let them and I have no doubt there's a lot of people who have no problem letting them.
I am not afraid of Skynet, or any of that "evil AI" silly scares. What is actually worrying though is that AI kind of devalues humans. The value of human life is decreasing.
Right now the AI we have the capability of building is just a tool. It is a very advanced tool, but a tool none the less. Just as knives were refined to chisels, chisels to routers, and routers to CNC; the tool has improved your access to information and media. The tool cannot create inspiration and creativity. Now it can open up a world of media and skills to those who never had them. A 17th century carpenter was a person with advanced training in a guild, and they needed that to build your basic constructions. Today you can build those same constructions using advanced tools with nothing more than hours of learning (instead of years).
So will AI open graphical art to those with limited graphics skills, will it open writing to those with limited writing experience…yes. Will it lower the bar to mastering the skills…yes. Will it fully replace the generation of initial ideas and the driving desire to be creative and share…no.
Some day that will probably not be true. But our current methods of constructing AI is like tool development. We feed it information and work on better and better taxonomy of that information so that the required elements can be reproduced. There is no pattern in that process to foster independent creation.
The problem with AI is that it can be very tempting to let it take decisions for you. I believe some people should think more about what they are making. Letting AI decide on too many details can be detrimental to your skills.
It doesn't mean that it's good or bad by design. It's a tool, that's what it is. We should think when using it.
Took me a second to realize why the thumbnail looked so different from Adam IRL,
then realized it was AI generated
Very appropriate
Yeah, first thing I noticed, but he didn't make any mention of it. Clever.
@@XlrationMedia It is mentioned in the description.
AI isn't "creative" in the sense of creating something novel. At least not the kind of AI that is taking off. It's just using a probabilistic process for generating content (be it art, music, coding advice, whatever) that has already been created. The current AI can make pop music that's already out there (to at least some extent), but it's not going to be making any new artform or running any complicated systems that requires critical thought or specific expertise.
We'll see where it goes from here, but it's mostly a productivity tool right now. It can do the broad strokes or help you solve a problem, but the human still needs to be there.
I'm also interested in if AI will be able to keep up with garbage created by AI, or if it'll all just coalesce into garbage the more AI generated content gets out there (i.e., garbage in = garbage out). I'm sure this is a problem that's been thought about.
It's not even really 'AI' in the true sense, it's machine learning as it can't think for itself. I'd agree on it not being creative, which is why I call it generative. It generates an image (or whatever), it doesn't create it and to me that's an important distinction.
people are just a bunch of cells, what's your point? Nothing is magic in the Universe, we already knew that.
I'll tell you what's wrong with AI. If AI didn't get you saying, "Well there's your problem." then that's the problem with AI.
So AI plus somebody’s personality (as in somebody takes the wheel behind the AI and steers the AI to do things for them) could equal valid artistic work?
This world is a better place with you in it Adam, please never change.
My thoughts about AI are that it’s not so much their capabilities that are a threat but the people that use them and push for their use. Because AI needs some sort of input or stimulation in order to do something it has no senses of its own to gather any input from the outside world to act on its own. I think of it as like a brain in a jar that just knows things but without sensory input it’s basically useless and dormant until someone stimulates its neural network.
I don’t know if you read these Adam all the time but I really liked what u said about AI art and creativity too and I just wanted to add my own thoughts because to me AI and human art is similar in that we have influences from the data we have gathered in our lives that influences how we make things. You think of a dark lord artwork to make or a robot design and your brain will automatically think either consciously or not every imagine it has seen that falls into those categories and when creating it that’s when you can refine that imagine into something original and give it a point. AI art is basically the same but it’s like the messy ideas or images we have in our minds about something that didn’t get translated and refined while being drawn with decision making being made and since AI is like a disembodied mind with no experience or way to explore ideas by itself yet it cannot make a point or a strong opinion on something so that’s where we start to get weird uncanny valley stuff. Humans have the lifetime of experience and constant sensory input to be original and creative but our creativity is influenced by the creativity of others and while AI does the same it has the severe disadvantage of having no life experience or capacity to grow on its own yet
I agree here! Originality is something AI lacks
I really dislike the "ai" buzzword. Since it's overselling what is in front of you. Should it be a language model or an image decoder. It's no inteligent instance. Its a model that predicts the next word or finds the image that fits the description through some interesting maths.
Converstional models are still just language models. And you can insturct it to do something. But guess what - it's 'trained' to generate the most fitting answer. It wont be very genuine or creative.
to the person that asked about finding people that share interests, adam is right, the internet is exactly where i met my people lol
i joined an anime group and it led to joining a kpop group and thats where i found my “found family” and theyre the greatest people i have ever met 😭 will gladly give them a kidney faster than a blood relative lmaooo 😂 (well extended family anyway lol)
but yeah dont be discouraged! theres so many groups, conventions and gatherings where you can meet new people ❤️ the world is alot nicer and cooler than we are raised to believe sometimes (speaking from someone who grew up very religious and was taught to not like certain things cause they were “evil”🙄)
Omg the thumbnail😭
Someone some time once said something like this: “As artists we’re constantly trying to heal ourselves through our work and we want to show our work, but in doing that we’re exposing ourselves to more of that which hurts us.” So it never stops. And if we stop making art, we die.
*can defiantly relate to that to that one on so many levels*
AI doing art doesn’t prevent people from making art
@@uhohhotdog*exactly...personally i've had a lot of fun generating the now over 13k images in the few months i've been doing this sort of thing but art wise i've been active in many forms of expression and aspects for decades...i see it as a tool when you have serious art block or just an idea that you want to experiment with and tweak along the way...since i use what amounts to as very long word salad prompts that include many things (concepts) and artistic that interest me the results are never boring or ordinary...one prompt can result in hundreds of images as i'll rearrange the structure of the prompt to give more weight to one thing than the others...i also consider art as my sanity therapy and far more effective than meds*
im so glad he doesn't just automatically hate it. there is real legitimate criticism of AI but so many talented artists just immediately jump on the hate bandwagon.
The Secret Invasion intro was less the point of view of the AI, it was the point of view of the VIEWER. The unease of something not human taking over and the uncanny valley of seeing something not human attempting to replicate humans... I thought it was rather poignant.
I’m a Concept Artist in the video gaming industry. AI has shaken up my industry. I don’t think AI would completely wipe out my role. But there will be a need for less of us for sure. The people on top are pushing for more use of AI to get ahead of the game and to move production faster. In some companies the Concept Artist is being bypassed all together. Because it’s faster to type in what you need for an idea for than to wait a couple of days for a concept made by a Concept Artist. I hope there’s a balance somewhere we could land on.
I think a major problem is that the layman's experience with AI is the extremely advanced sci-fi AI that is good at everything, but then when that person is exposed to real life AI, they are disappointed, confused, and scared because they think that everyone is putting their faith in this hunk of junk that is only marginally better at art than most people who have never learned to draw.
I think it is better to see AI as a tool or assistant rather than the creative lead. Like how film crew members are each incredibly talented in their area of expertise, but without the overhead guidance of a director, they would struggle to make a coherent film.
I think people get scammed by it being called AI instead of procedural learning by thinking exactly what you just said.
Computers fundamentally can't become intelligent like biological entities are. Mathamatics itself as a representative toolset of reality can't give us the whole picture and is meaningless without context, the same is true for any program. Everything a computer can do a person has to instruct it very carefully how to do so, and it must be given all the parts and information to get the process done or it will halt mid process.
The Halting Problem is a famous computer engineering flaw that states any given machine is unable to determine if the process it will run will stop or go on forever. Its fundementally impossible for a machine to look at an input and reliably determine if it will cause a memory leak.
You can have stored inferences where a machine recognizes previous outcomes, but a new input requires intuition and biological intelligence to determine futility.
If we made the perfect procedural learning software and asked it the meaning of life it would probably run forever or until it ran out of memory. That's where computers fall short of ever being intelligent.
I think the only thing that makes AI impressive in its current state, is that most popular art (including graphic art, cinema, music, etc) is incredibly generic, and it has already traded in its aspiration of "being art" in exchange for "being content".
AI is great at generating content. It follows your prompt to the letter, pulls from whatever source it has available, mishmashes all of it together and makes something that resembles everything else. It doesn't want to introduce changes to the product, it doesn't fight for a certain aesthetic, it doesn't go on strike. If you think about it, it's an executive's dream. Hollywood is already spitting out superhero movies like they were all written in four seconds by an AI.
If we as an audience settle for that, then there you go: unlimited content is around the corner. The thing is, I don't believe we'd settle, not for long.
@@jllemin4let me know when you have the correct meaning of life to train an AI on.
@@griffingeode Life gets meaning from the relationships you have with others around you. Life gets its purpose from serving something greater than yourself which dictates how you create those relationships with the others around you.
It is written, but above all else, love the Lord God with all your heart, soul, and mind. And love your neighbor as yourself.
@@griffingeode I wish you had something more to say. I think my answer is pretty good, if not right on. The only real meaning in life is to serve a righteous purpose and/or to love one another.
If you have no friends, no family, no job, or no purpose, your life is meaningless.
I think... Hopefully people will recognize what you do, and even if art is generated by AI, people will create something amazing with the over-arching vision and viewpoint of the art, rather than simply making visually nice art.
Because... I think there's more to art than just making an image that looks good, and I think it would be cool if people explored other aspects
How does an AI know truth from lies if humans are fed a constant supply of lies? Whoever trains their AI model, controls what they believe.
The only saving grace is the ais generators are literally black boxes and not even the people making em understand it, it's just much too complex and intertwined, which isnt good for anybody to be fair
How do HUMANS
So spot on
Edit- except for the internet being about misogyny and death cult. That’s hyperbole and also dead wrong. Adam is too deep in the SF bubble.
>Complains the internet is a cesspool of misogyny.
>Calls his wife his "partner". 🙄🙄
So disrespectful.