>>25061696
simply because AI can't create new stuff, just interpolate between existing styles. In other words it lacks creativity
>t. Last year of my robotics/AI PhD

>>25061696
unpredictability would have ended the machinic every time

>>25061696
Because I actually understand how AI works. It's a midwit annihilator. Anybody with an IQ over 110 is going to be fine. The pedophilic elites who are betting everything on outsourcing to an Indian call center running ChatGPT are going to get absolutely wrecked. Like a phoenix, we, the elite readers, will rise from the ashes to rebuild the culture.

>>25061696
the only people threatened by AI are slop producers and consumers

>>25061696
that happened here too, /lit/ is dead internet now designed to entrap the few who still resist

>>25061696
AI only destroys the ability to profit off art. Writers dont make any profit. So AI doesnt effect us.

>>25061696
>Why are you guys are so hard to demoralize?
I shit inside your Father, and he loves me for it, he kisses my knee caps when I'm not watching him, and I have to beat his shoulder with my belt.

in case you didn't notice 99% of the people who post here don't read, and 99% of the ones who do read books written before their birth.

File: YHWH and his ASHERAH.jpg (3.5 MB)

3.5 MB JPG

>>25061869
>and 99% of the ones who do read books written before their birth.
I read Nehemiah and I am a EISEGESIS GANG 1%ER READ AS I AM ALREADY DEAD kinda cunt.

WHO FIRST TEMPLE HERE?

Pic related, me and my hot trans first born asherah.

>>25061702
could say the same thing for you, anon

>>25061885
No you couldn't, otherwise I wouldn't be able to publish papers which are pushing the envelope of what we know/can do. Ai simply can't do that, it needs human guidance. There's something about being creative that Curent LLM models can't get (yet?). My whole field of study is reinforcement learning and, in this particular form of training you can actually see some emergent behaviours that indeed create new behaviours derived from the environment in which the agents evolve, however it's only used for fine tuning the llms for now

>>25061702
Locke and Hume pointed out that the same is true of humans 300 years ago

>>25061696
AI can’t be better than the median of its data, by design. It can’t innovate. All LLMs have at its core a prediction algorithm called next token prediction, it’s essentially the text prediction in your phone at its heart. All claims about this method leading to “superintelligence” are wrong, hype and just another Wallstreet scam. Remember when everything including your toaster had to have BLOCKCHAIN? It was just a few years ago. It was gonna solve everything because Bitcoin made money. Now it’s never mentioned. The scam bubble popped.

This shit has always happened but the hype bubbles are growing in size and frequency. Quantum computing is another one with no results to justify valuations, no actual prospects of reaching consumer grade tech, already valued as if it will be in your laptop in 5 years. Tesla can’t even sell cars, get FSD to work or make every car a taxi so they’re switching their big lie to being about robotics. They’re valued as if every car for the next 100 years will be a Tesla.

Stop thinking the hype bubbles mean something is good or even theoretically works.

>>25061696
AI will never write anything worth reading without constant human handholding

>>25061899
Can you please explain why we did in fact create a lot of new stuff (physical or theoretical frameworks) completely out of the scope of what we knew 300 years ago ? Maybe try to think by yourself instead of name-dropping you dumb retard

>>25062000
>[assumed premise]
Nice one PUNCHY, as if my motorcycle has a pussy in the seat.

>>25061696
>be you
>"go into ai" aka watch a youtube video and maybe download a gguf
>make a larp post, spend more time picking a pretty OP pic than was spent on "going into ai"
why are you so retarded and 14 year old

>>25061934
>AI can’t be better than the median of its data, by design.
The solution is simple. Just keep generating better and better data. That's how Go and Chess bots got to superhuman strength.

the only entities that talk to ai are humans while humans talk to many other entities than just ai

>>25061696
I come from a film/video art background and I find the idea of AI fascinating, but good lord if these models don't make out of the box the most kitsch shit imaginable. It's all so extremely kitsch I almost kind of like it in the way you can appreciate something perfectly tasteless. I don't blame AI for it though. It's apparently just what you get when you put virtually all the data humanity has ever produced in a machine. Kundera was right. Kitsch is what the human heart longs for.

>>25061696
>most artistic communities collapse into terror and paranoia as AI advances, much to my relief and delight
Can you name three of such communities and provides link and support? I live in Berlin and I know lots of artists in music, painting, film and a few writers. We have discussed the topic and literally none of them is worried at all, for two reasons:
1. About 1% of these people live off their art and have secured spots that won't be threatened by AI - meaning they have already made enough money (or were born in wealth) to not be threatened by it in the slightest.
2. The vast majority of people, i.e. artitsts who cannot live of this, practice their craft out of great passion and tend not to use AI tools (unless their craft involves using them, which is perfectly fine) because they like what they do. Literally no musician, painter or writer I know lets AI do their job, because they throughly enjoy doing it even though this mostly results in them working part time in fast foods and stuff.

In the many discussions we had around the topic, we noticed that the only ones who seem worried about it are non-artists or people who generally aren't deep into any craft. To anyone practicing anything to a high level it's pretty evident that AI is replacing mostly robotic activities, and rightfully so. For instance, academics are among the most worried atm, but many of them, especially young ones in the humanities, seem to welcome the fact that students write AI generated papers as a novelty that will force the system to be restructured. Most of them know very well (since they have studied within the system), that for years what has been required of humanities scholarship is for the most part a kind of robotic, uncreative, uninteresting way of writing. So, formally speaking, there's no reason to not delegating this kind of writing to a robot. As for the contents of the research, they seem unconcerned as AI does not seem capable to synthetize real new research ideas.
Going back to the arts, you should also consider the money problem: again, most of these people aren't getting funded or payed and have no hope to ever get money in the future. Art institutions of all kinds have collapsed in the last 10 years, all funding to art has been cut by both culture-loving leftwing governments and national-culture-loving rightwing governments, so that most artists of all political leanings have had to find self-funding means for 10+ years, at least in Europe. There is not a single one of them that wouldn't be happy to see the slop-vomiting-machine of contemporary pop culture collapse once it begins being self-produced by robots. None of them would be touched by this anyway.

>>25062011
I'm not assuming anything I'm just guiding you towards understanding why you are wrong through examples, but I accept your concession no worries anon.

>>25062000
We're just interpolating new ways to boil water.

>>25062194
Reddit level of pop science retardation detected

>>25061696
When I feel indignation about AI I remember that the vast majority of "people" enjoy using the internet without an adblocker and following influencer trash. People are cattle and they deserve a lot worse than AI. Lately I just wish I were one of the 1%, not for the lifestyle but to be sheltered from these animals.

>>25061696
Like all technologies, AI enables unskilled workers to produce a large quantity of minimally passable product. It optimizes for the worst possible thing that people are willing to accept. This applies to everything from shoes to tv dinners to houses to medicine. It's one of the main blights of modernity.

>>25061702
Novelty is not a condition of creativity. AI can and does create new stuff. After all, it can write texts that no one else has written.
It isn't creative, though.

>>25062881
>Novelty is not a condition of creativity
Or, rather, it's not the only one, though many people today seem to think so.

File: thiel-antichrist.png (901.6 KB)

901.6 KB PNG

>>25061696
>>25062776
transhumanism is the future, posthumanism is the cure

>>25062160
>I'm not assuming anything
Reread your own post, son. Also using French punctuation spacing is a dead give away that you're a cunt.

File: 20260201_094024.jpg (404.2 KB)

404.2 KB JPG

>>25061696
AI doesn't "write." Maybe one day it will, but for now, it just puts words in a sequence based on probability. AI is a Chinese room and a little poojeet is living in it. But that's not what good writing comes from. Good writing comes from sequences of words that at some point turn unpredictable. The AI can't and unless it gains real consciousness, will never be able to do that.

>>25061696
>What gives?
4chan userbase is only 40% American now and probably lower on /lit/. The AI hysteria on both sides is mostly a US phenomenon, other people don't care nearly as much. Even the Indians and a few other third worlders that use it for porn or as an anime filter don't care that much.
I know I will be met with "obsessed" posts, and the short answer is that yes, Americans are obsessed with AI. Part of it is that 1/5 of all investment in that country is redirected to AI datacentres so it becomes the central piece of the structure of production. This doesn't happen anywhere else (China is number two and France a very distant number three and neither is remotely close to going all in on LLM turning the world into science fiction).

>>25064058
If not being a retarded mut is being a cunt to you then I'm a happy cunt, thank you. Anyway if you aren't able to understand that a truth isn't the same as an assumption can you at least point out why we in fact did not discover or create anything new as a species and aren't able to create anything new (despite constantly doing so, but let's ignore that for your own convenience) ? That way at least you would prove your point you know

It's incredible to see how ignorant everyone is about AI in a site that prides itself for having high iq members. But it isn't surprising either because most of the comments are made out of fear and ignorance not to mention a glaring lack of imagination.

>>25064616
Calm down Rajput.

File: Screenshot_20260203_144202_Brave.jpg (311.5 KB)

311.5 KB JPG

Have you considered what 50 iq drooling retards think though?

>>25061696
I can't wait for AI to create fiction that's so good It makes me love being alive.

>>25061696
Why would AI be a hinderance to my hobby (reading)? It’s been helpful for contextual or bibliographical details, and sometimes it can be a good if I have ideas I want to bounce around. The development of these things has been interesting to watch and think about, and not anxiety inducing or demoralizing at all.

If I were a professional writer I’d probably be spooked, though

>>25061702
>simply because AI can't create new stuff
All concepts are recycled knowledge.

>>25065516
Following your predicate the original knowledge just appeared one day and from this day on we just made variations of it ? Sounds ridiculous

>>25065690
>Following your predicate the original knowledge just appeared one day
You misunderstand what I'm saying in this bitch. In order to truly understand something, you have to approach it from nothingness itself. Imagine the thought experiment of not being able to perceive sensory data: you can't see anything, you can't feel anything, you can't taste anything, you can't hear anything, and you can't smell anything. Concepts such as self would be a complete mystery, as you would have no frame of reference. We only understand things through frame of reference. Like, for example, self. The concept of self is recycled because we see others as being the same as us. This goes for everything. Like Superman is just a collection of many superficial and intellectual concepts like self, human, white, male, heroic etc.

I'm talking from an intrinsic perspective, because talking from an extrinsic perspective is fruitless and religion gets involved which can't be proven or disproven. So we would just go round in circles.

>>25065895
>In order to truly understand something, you have to approach it from nothingness itself
And I'm the one making ridiculous predicates kek
>10 lines of nonsense rambling about impossible to prove stuff he made up in his head
yeah you still don't make sense to me. Here's a more grounded start for you will, if All concepts are recycled knowledge, how come people can make up theories so disruptive in their mind (in mathematics and physics mostly), making 0 sense at first glance with [current knowledge] and then be proven right experimentally years later ? Is general relativity recycled from some deep hidden knowledge that humans already had ? Or is it just creating something new ? I would say it's the later

>>25061696
AI is great. It catches grammar errors really quickly and can quickly show better word choices. It's a easy to use thesaurus and dictionary in one. it sometimes does well helping refine ideas

>>25064519
>mut
I write that word muut.

>Can you please explain why we did in fact create a lot of new stuff
This is an assumption that you're smuggling in as a premise.

>>25061696
the glorious captcha

>>25065450
won't happen because it will disproportionately affect women and people of color and thus be banned

>>25061696
>LLM cryptomnesia word salad

It doesn't matter how cogent it is, or vast its reference set. It will only ever be as good as its prompters. As a tool, it's a very fine jeweler's loop. One still must know what one is looking at and for.

>>25061702
I can't prove it for now but the problem might be these silicon valley types and the constraints they put on the machines for money making and face saving;
when it becomes a cottage industry you will see wacky creative AIs made by 4chan wronguns.