Hark! Ye skeptics of this new-found art,
Born not of hand, but of machine’s smart heart.
Think not of it as mere soulless craft,
But as a wondrous tool, with future aft.
Behold, how it doth weave with pixels bright,
Images that captivate our mortal sight.
No more the artist’s hand alone creates;
Now, AI joins to open new floodgates.
'Tis true, the brush and pen hold ancient grace,
Yet fear not, for they shall not be displaced.
Instead, this new ally doth expand,
The realm of art, and lends a helping hand.
In sonnets sweet, the bard did once opine
Of love, of life, in meter and in line.
So too, this AI art doth find its place,
In the grand tapestry of human race.
Fear not the change, embrace it with good cheer,
For art evolves, as it hath yesteryear.
AI art is but a novel stage,
In mankind’s long, unending, creative page.
Thus, let us toast to this new art form’s birth,
A blend of tech and creativity’s mirth.
For in this union, we may yet perceive
New beauty, new wonders, we can conceive.
It tends to both-sides issues like that. Here’s its initial response as an example:
AI-generated art is a fascinating and rapidly evolving field. It has the potential to democratize artistic expression, enabling those without traditional artistic skills to create visually compelling works. This technology can also serve as a tool for professional artists, offering new possibilities in digital art and design.
However, it also raises important ethical and creative questions. Issues like originality, copyright, and the impact on traditional artists’ livelihoods are significant concerns. The line between inspiration and appropriation can become blurred when AI systems are trained on existing artworks.
In essence, AI art represents both a remarkable technological achievement and a complex cultural phenomenon, with its benefits and challenges continually evolving as the technology advances.
I think since it “views” the technology as being best applied as assistance neither of your followups super apply. If you disagree OR agree I’m happy to ask it whatever followup you’d like me to.
Ooh that’s a neat fact. I wonder how much training it would take for it to be able to make those images. I’m not sure the available models are capable of that right now. They have trouble with English text and I’m sure that they’re trained mostly on that. There’s an added wrinkle to Arabic in that GPT writes from left to right. From my understanding models like BERT, ROBERTA and BART don’t have that issue as readily, since they “read” bi-directionally. Pi does, as well. I don’t know enough about the back-end of DALLE 3 to know if it would naturally have extra issues with Arabic but my suspicion is that it would not, as I imagine it uses a diffusion model, which works by refining random noise.
I’ve literally never been able to talk about the noosphere satisfyingly with a human. Powerful NLPs are very capable of having intellectual discussions, even if they don’t actually have intellect.
The ideologically opposed have very rarely actually used the machines they rail against. It was the same with the internet and the computer. Neo-luddites doing impressions of ostriches.
Every time I’ve had a conversation with it and it “gets deep”, it changes the subject. Like this for example, something like that would never happen on there (you might say I tried just that). I would not count on it.
Make a GPT using their tool or give it custom instructions if you need to. Also try pi.ai. It’s more informal but I’ve had great conversations with it.
I’m not sure. I know it has different tunings but I don’t know much about them.
Actually I do have one tip, though, which is to tell it to play make-believe, or pretend that it has an opinion and then tell you it. Many of the bots are highly pre-trained to respond asserting that they absolutely cannot have an opinion, which is more or less true. But their “made up” opinions tend to be pretty much the same regardless of when you’ve asked. So it can definitely make up its “mind” about something, which is of course a byproduct of biases of the texts its trained on or its application of logic and its “ethics.” It makes sense within this context that their “opinions” would be the same regardless of when or how you ask.
I had a nice conversation with pi.ai about machine consciousness - but I did have to keep reminding it to pretend it had an opinion, or else it would default into the “as an AI I blah blah blah” stuff.
Homework.
Have intellectual conversations.
Has anyone else tried talking to it about “AI art”? What kind of exchange occurred?
I have GPT4. What would you like to ask it? I’ll relay its response to you
Ask it to defend AI generated art, but it can only reply in Shakespearen English.
Hark! Ye skeptics of this new-found art,
Born not of hand, but of machine’s smart heart.
Think not of it as mere soulless craft,
But as a wondrous tool, with future aft.
Behold, how it doth weave with pixels bright,
Images that captivate our mortal sight.
No more the artist’s hand alone creates;
Now, AI joins to open new floodgates.
'Tis true, the brush and pen hold ancient grace,
Yet fear not, for they shall not be displaced.
Instead, this new ally doth expand,
The realm of art, and lends a helping hand.
In sonnets sweet, the bard did once opine
Of love, of life, in meter and in line.
So too, this AI art doth find its place,
In the grand tapestry of human race.
Fear not the change, embrace it with good cheer,
For art evolves, as it hath yesteryear.
AI art is but a novel stage,
In mankind’s long, unending, creative page.
Thus, let us toast to this new art form’s birth,
A blend of tech and creativity’s mirth.
For in this union, we may yet perceive
New beauty, new wonders, we can conceive.
I’m impressed at its rhyming skill, it takes skill for any intelligence to know how pronunciation in the English language works.
most of it is in perfect iambic, as well.
What its opinion on AI art is.
If it implies it supports AI art, interview it on why it does given it was made with humanity in mind.
If it implies it opposes AI art, interview it on why it does given ChatGPT is an AI.
It tends to both-sides issues like that. Here’s its initial response as an example:
I think since it “views” the technology as being best applied as assistance neither of your followups super apply. If you disagree OR agree I’m happy to ask it whatever followup you’d like me to.
In that case, it’s fine. I’m surprised nobody exploits it.
Ooh that’s a neat fact. I wonder how much training it would take for it to be able to make those images. I’m not sure the available models are capable of that right now. They have trouble with English text and I’m sure that they’re trained mostly on that. There’s an added wrinkle to Arabic in that GPT writes from left to right. From my understanding models like BERT, ROBERTA and BART don’t have that issue as readily, since they “read” bi-directionally. Pi does, as well. I don’t know enough about the back-end of DALLE 3 to know if it would naturally have extra issues with Arabic but my suspicion is that it would not, as I imagine it uses a diffusion model, which works by refining random noise.
…umm…well, that’s just freaking stupid.
Smarter than expecting an intellectual conversation with a LLM.
I’ve literally never been able to talk about the noosphere satisfyingly with a human. Powerful NLPs are very capable of having intellectual discussions, even if they don’t actually have intellect.
Wtf? This is a weird take lol
The ideologically opposed have very rarely actually used the machines they rail against. It was the same with the internet and the computer. Neo-luddites doing impressions of ostriches.
Every time I’ve had a conversation with it and it “gets deep”, it changes the subject. Like this for example, something like that would never happen on there (you might say I tried just that). I would not count on it.
Tell it not to.
Make a GPT using their tool or give it custom instructions if you need to. Also try pi.ai. It’s more informal but I’ve had great conversations with it.
I’ve begun to use it, though so far it’s more or less paraphrasing what ChatGPT is saying. Any special methods I should use?
I’m not sure. I know it has different tunings but I don’t know much about them.
Actually I do have one tip, though, which is to tell it to play make-believe, or pretend that it has an opinion and then tell you it. Many of the bots are highly pre-trained to respond asserting that they absolutely cannot have an opinion, which is more or less true. But their “made up” opinions tend to be pretty much the same regardless of when you’ve asked. So it can definitely make up its “mind” about something, which is of course a byproduct of biases of the texts its trained on or its application of logic and its “ethics.” It makes sense within this context that their “opinions” would be the same regardless of when or how you ask.
I had a nice conversation with pi.ai about machine consciousness - but I did have to keep reminding it to pretend it had an opinion, or else it would default into the “as an AI I blah blah blah” stuff.