AI 2023. Meet ChatGPT. - page 212
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Logic limps not only on two legs, but both arms as well.
It has previously been argued that the works of Van Gogh, and other "alternative" masters, will never be replicated by the networks. Repeated. Reproduced and any images in the style of these "inimitable" masters can be created.
But the point is not that the works of alternative artists "cannot be repeated", but that it is now claimed that they are not masters at all, but "under-artists" who could not adapt to the advent of photography.))
In addition, it is constantly asserted that the market will be flooded with artificial "consumer goods" of low quality..... So, what does it turn out that the works of real living artists have always been of low quality, if now the quality is higher in artificial images (in any style, including the style of unique "expensive" masters) and which is unavailable to living masters?))
It's just a transitional period in human life and culture, it's been that way many times before. Development occurs in a narrowing spiral, repeating each time the passed stages of development, but each time at a qualitatively new level. And each time more and more unnecessary husks fall off on the way of spiral development. Now, as before, the works of real artists are still in price (in any sense). Art never dies, but rises to a new level every time. Art is like a litmus test of the presence of reason, if art disappears, it means that reason has disappeared, it means that the desire to create has disappeared and there is only the desire to sell more expensive that every time sells worse and worse by deception and imposition of false ideals.
Luddite uprising.
Making ends meet: global showbiz stars call for curbing neural networks
look at how much it costs them to play a concert
And AI is normal.
Now just about anyone who knows a little bit about music can do a much better job.
now almost anyone who knows a little bit about music can make a much better one.
Luddite rebellion.
Making ends meet: global showbiz stars call for curbing neural networks
why is it unethical ?
No, it doesn't.
Personally, I have plans to do something.
when the muse strikes.
;)
It can't.
Alas, yes, it can. There's a neural network called Suno. It generates any hit song to the AI's lyrics. You set the genre for the music, the theme for the song, the type of voice, the style of performance, instruments, backing vocals, etc.... It's very cool, so you can't tell the difference from a live performance.
Here, music is also a great example. Because what do most people listen to? - What sells well, what is "fashionable". And "fashion" for music (as well as for painting, clothes, jewellery and many other things) is imposed artificially, for the sake of profit.
All kinds of Yandex-music, online cinemas give a false sense of freedom of choice, but there is no freedom of choice! I personally use Yandex-music and it's not a bad service, thanks to a good enough system of preferences you can very flexibly set up playlists, and the system already suggests suitable tracks. And quite often I find that I like something I've never heard before just because it's "unfashionable". And why should I listen to what is imposed on me, especially when I have the opportunity to create music strictly for me? When I was young I used to write music for myself, not for sale, in special software, but it took too much time and I had to give it up. And now I can directly hear in my head the possibilities of creating completely new sounds, combinations of sounds, and it becomes possible to create it! And suitable music individually for a person can create incredible impressions and even have a physiological effect: goosebumps on the skin, release of adrenaline, production of melatonin, serotonin and other hormones, which in some cases help to fall asleep and in other cases to gain strength for a productive day.
Craft dies, but art is eternal as long as the mind is alive.
One more point, it is very difficult for an intelligent being to be fooled more than once on the same thing. That's why red, blue, yellow squares are not sold now, and there really were such attempts.)) People are beginning to better distinguish the beautiful from the empty and begin to realise what they used to be deceived on. This, of course, is very unpleasant for those who made money by imposing certain images for profit. I won't give examples, most of the handsome Marlboro men died of lung cancer.
Mining:
Introduction:
Let's focus on basic information and key metrics. The following parameters will help navigate the topic:
The global objectives of the study are:
1) To realise the physical and economic potential of 'android' automation given the current and near-term stage of robotics technology development.
2) To find factors in the development of robotics that will dramatically or gradiently shift the balance of profitability between human and android worker, towards the latter.
Secondary tasks:
1) The first secondary problem solves one of the main questions of this topic, namely: the introduction of humanoid robots in any process serving their production increases the percentage of realisation of the so-called "autoreproduction of mechanisms", and we will try to predict how far in reality this process can develop. Will it ever reach 100% or will physics have the last word against it? And if it does - how long can it stay at this level? We will try to look into the future and see if robots will ever become an independent species or the"next stage of evolution". After all, if self-sustaining 100% autoreproduction is impossible according to the laws of physics, the future AI will calculate this fact and give up the idea of "rebellion", realising the doom of independent existence, and if self-sustaining 100% autoreproduction is possible, we are in for a fascinating journey into the future in the style of the film "Terminator"))))).
2) I'll be honest - I' m not interested in the question of the "Rise of AI" in the literal sense, but it is interesting to me in the context of solving one of the most fascinating mysteries of nature - self-reproduction of life. Can humans, with the help of their technology, replicate it in a non-biological way?
3) Also, by travelling through industries and delving deeper into production processes, we will be able to better understand the near future of automation and see the vectors of development of the technology market, which opens up excellent prospects for profitable investments. But that's only if we can avoid gross mistakes and misconceptions.
Next on the mining industry...
Human-centricity does not allow us to look beyond human capabilities. For example, the kinematic scheme of the joints of humans, and indeed of biological species in general, cannot have joints that allow rotation of more than 360 degrees, does not allow for very efficient gears:
An incomplete list of gears that humans cannot have:
Gears: Gears are used to transmit rotary motion between two shafts using gears.
Worm gears: Worm gears are used to transmit rotary motion between two shafts that intersect at right angles.
Belt gears: Belt gears are used to transmit rotary motion between two shafts using a belt.
Chain transmission: Chain transmissions are used to transmit rotary motion between two shafts using a chain.
Hydraulic transmission: Hydraulic transmissions are used to transmit power between two components using a fluid.
Pneumatic transmission: Pneumatic transmissions are used to transmit power between two components using air.
Humans have the following types of transmissions in their joints:
Hinge transmission: Hinge transmission: Hinge transmission allows bones to rotate in a For example, the knee and elbow have hinge gears.
Sliding Gears: Sliding gears allow bones to slide into each other. For example, the wrist and ankle have sliding gears.
And those gears available to humans have significant limitations. As you can see, robots with mechanical bodies have an unlimited advantage over the conventional bodies of biological species.
The above is so, to understand that the kinematic scheme of biological species have significant limitations. But the main thing I wanted to say is that nature has an incredibly huge number of examples of species that cannot exist without their partner species. And, of course, this option of co-operation between humans and mechanical life forms is not considered, for some reason. Among other things, there are also scenarios of human and technological development (symbiosis) that are absolutely unbelievable from the point of view of modern realities:
Species that cannot live without each other are called *symbionts*.
Symbiosis is a close and long-term interaction between two different species that benefits both species. There are three main types of symbiosis:
Mutualism: Both species benefit from the interaction.
Commensalism: One species benefits from the interaction, while the other neither benefits nor harms.
Parasitism: One species (the parasite) benefits from the interaction, while the other species (the host) is harmed.
Examples of symbionts:
Mutualism:
* Fungi and algae in lichens
* Bacteria living in the human gut
* Ants and aphids
Commensalism:
* Stickleback fish that attach themselves to sharks
* Birds that nest in trees
* Epiphytes (plants) that grow on other plants
Parasitism:
* Fleas and the animals they live on
* Mistletoe and the trees it grows on
* Viruses and the cells they infect
Symbiosis is an important factor in ecosystems. It allows species to survive and thrive in environments where they could not survive individually.