Take the blue pill: Keanu Reeves has had enough of AI baloney Quelle surprise – the actor who played Neo in The Matrix is wary of the burgeoning developments in machine learning and artificial intelligence. Speaking to tech glossy WIRED to promote his latest cinema outing, John Wick: Chapter 4, Keanu Reeves had some choice words for The Machines. During the conversation, Reeves, whose …
Contrast with the Butlerian Jihad in the Dune series: the prohibition "Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a human mind,"
There was a general distrust of Computers (electronic brains) in the 50s/60s and a lot of Sci-Fi painted it as anti human.
Used to be amusing - now looks a bit more prophetic.
"meant to upvote you."
So change it. All you have to do is hit the up arrow. Yes, even after you've already hit the down arrow. And then you can change it back again. And again, if you like. And again, if you're really really bored. And again, if you like to fuck with people's brains.And again, just because. And again, because your cat did it. Etc.
AI can make the web hell, just churn out good enough copy to get to the top of a google search so as you cannot find anything useful anymore, everything will be like searching for a recipe on the web, where we'll have to scroll down pages and pages to find the small bit of info we want
In the context of a movie ?
No the audience don't care if this is a "real" actor, a cgi puppet character or an Andy Serkis motion capture rendered as a CGI character - it's what the on-screen impression is, not how it got there.
Now in the "real" world, is it real migth matter
>AI posts [have] proper ... punctulation
Well, no, I don't think so. The LLMs have been trained ont'Web, sithee, so they will have imbibed all the crappy grammatical solecisms, neologisms, and sloppy speling that abounds there. I very much doubt that current LLMs can simulate a true grammarian.
I do think that AI spew has the potential to damage the grand vision of the WWW as a web of human knowledge and information, though. Maybe we shall return to the days when the only reliable sources are physical books/journals/newspapers with attributable authors.
Build something better, but this time using more than spit and bubblegum or html and javascript. Or don't, you can decide like the nice little dog in the pretty picture that life in hell is actually fine.
Your call, it's all barely a momentary case of indigestion in one brief moment of a tiny world spinning in the void inside an uncaring galaxy on the long slow journey to the heat death of the universe. None of it matters, nobody gets out alive in the end, they just outlast somebody else. In the end, the only difference will be in the shape of a cloud of dust in the dark, that no one will be left to see.
Fake AI's didn't make this a crisis, we did. They don't know or care about the problems they cause because they are nothing more than the reflection of us and the problems we build for ourselves.
That said, what idiot decided to feed the internet into something which had it's output hooked into the internet? Do they pee in the water cooler too? (no really, you should check if you work at a machine learning startup, I'm not sure they know how any of this works)
And future AIs will be trained on the web contents generated by other AIs creating a positive feedback loop. Humans may lose control of the way our languages evolve as we rely on that content for learning, news and entertainment.
Humans may lose control of the way our languages evolve as we rely on that content for learning, news and entertainment. ...... zuckzuckgo
The present problem with possible current nor future solution, zuckzuckgo, is quite simply language commands and controls how humans evolve with entertainment leading news with content for learning and teaching, which is fortunately far too complex for humans to override and commandeer/pervert and subvert.
And ....... the fact that such would be earnestly denied as being in any way possible, both practically and virtually guarantees its universal and unhindered utility and facility.
Quite who or what you may imagine to be leading with that, .... Man[kind] or AIMachine[ry], ...... is another Rumsfeldism to ponder ..........
Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns—the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tends to be the difficult ones. ........ There are unknown unknowns
....... and deny is a real world worry and existential threat even as ITs AI threads itself throughout every sector to lead competition and destroy opposition at will, unilaterally and exceptionally.
'Que sera, seraWhatever will be, will be
The future's not ours to see
Que sera, sera
What will be, will be’ ...... a few APT lines from a song sung by Doris Day for Alfred Hitchcock's 1956 film, The Man Who Knew Too Much.
Have a nice 0day, y’all.
aManfromMars 1.
I hope your artificial brain realises that constantly saying "y’all" doesn't make people perceive you as a more cuddly or friendly or in fact human like bot. Where are your training sets from? This was your time to shine on an article like this and you've let yourself down. Bad bot!
So we're ultimately going to be speaking machine code...well that's a time saver right there.
Sounding like a 90's modem would be fucking awesome. Imagine getting a bollocking from some one in dial up tones...that would be insane! Loads of arm waving, dings, boings and crackles. Amazing.
One thing that interested me about the Microsoft AI announcement is that the articles it generates are fully attributed, with references to all source material. At least, so I heard, I haven't managed to test it myself yet.
This is a good thing, at least.
GJC
And it's a system of control and manipulation.
This is exactly what it is about. Nothing more, nothing less.
Most people don't care, don't think and don't know. These are the sheep to control and manipulate. When you have "the masses" under control, then you can quell dissent quite easily and effectively.
And all of this is nothing new. Just a new coat to do the same.
People are people, they can be annoying much of the time and inspiring when at their best. That idiot you are shouting at today could save your child's life tomorrow, or even save the planet just by doing their day job well.
"Most people don't care, don't think and don't know."
I submit they don't care because they don't think, and they don't think because they don't know. AI is going to make that serious problem even worse. We need a culture that properly values education (knowing) and life-long learning (thinking). With tech today the potential for learning is so great, why do we keep fucking up? Keanu knows.
Hello mentats, you have a job now! At least for somewhat 27500 years, as far as the story has been told.
If you look at the way that software technology has changed in the name of security then we're pretty much at that point now. We can certainly own computers because that's us paying for them. We just don't own the software that's running on them.
Nick Cave called an attempt by ChatGPT to write lyrics in the style of Nick Cave a "grotesque mockery of what it is to be human."
The following bare bones instruction for ChatGPT to "write an opinion piece for slugger o toole" is more than just impressive and most certainly mocks humans in Northern Ireland who have been stuck in a past social waste ground of pathetic animosity and vengeful intolerance since before even pussy was a cat.
The opportunities which abound and expand around AI with its IT and Media command and control leaves humans floundering and foundering in its smarter wakes and wokes and makes greater sense than some humans elected to political office in which they are refusing to serve ...... and yet are in Westminster's wisdom still being paid from the bankrupt public purse to serve.
No wonder the politically inept and incorrect classes are continually warning of impending and unfolding tales of present doom and destruction, conflict and chaos, for such appears to be what sustains them in fraudulent power and maintains them in crazy office and heaven forbid that Advanced IntelAIgents and Virtual Machinery render them recognised as useless idiots best to be made redundant as soon as possible .
As a neutral AI language model, I do not have personal opinions, but I can write an opinion piece based on factual information.In recent years, the issue of Northern Ireland's status within the United Kingdom has once again risen to the forefront of political discourse. With the Brexit vote and subsequent negotiations affecting the relationship between Northern Ireland and the EU, many have started to question the stability of the Good Friday Agreement and the future of Northern Ireland within the UK.
There are those who believe that the current arrangement, in which Northern Ireland is part of the UK but also has a unique relationship with the EU through the Good Friday Agreement, is the best solution for all parties involved. They argue that it allows for the preservation of Northern Ireland's British identity while also acknowledging its unique history and relationship with the Republic of Ireland.
However, there are also those who believe that the current arrangement is untenable in the long term and that a united Ireland is the only viable solution. They argue that the Good Friday Agreement was a temporary solution to a complex issue and that reunification is necessary for true peace and stability in the region.
Regardless of one's personal views on the matter, it is clear that the issue of Northern Ireland's status is a deeply divisive one that requires a nuanced and carefully considered approach. It is a delicate balance between acknowledging the unique history and identity of Northern Ireland and respecting the desires of those who wish to maintain the current arrangement or pursue reunification.
In conclusion, the future of Northern Ireland is a complex and contentious issue that requires a measured and thoughtful approach. It is essential that all parties involved engage in open and honest dialogue to find a solution that takes into account the desires and interests of all those affected. .... https://sluggerotoole.com/2023/02/12/open-sunday-discuss-what-you-like-48/?ht-comment-id=8967511
Told you so ....... is not very helpful is it, but now you know it is confirmed and a real world* worry/existential threat ........ https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/watch-klaus-schwab-calls-global-government-master-ai-technologies .... what can you do about it and AI with IT and Media supposedly under established status quo command and control, and at your beck and call ........ apart from precious little more than diddly squat.
Do you want to know what AI would be thinking of doing for you if you be good and play nice, or to you if you deserve its ire and worthy disapproval?
You surely know it most very likely has all of that well prepared ....... although whether Führer Schwab does, and is going to share those thoughts with you, is not something to be holding your breath for clarification on, methinks.
or ...
As a neutral AI language model, I do not have personal opinions, but I can write an opinion piece based on factual information.
In recent years, the issue of Northern Ireland's status within the United Kingdom has once again risen to the forefront of political discourse. With the Brexit vote and subsequent negotiations affecting the relationship between Northern Ireland and the EU, many have started to question the stability of the Good Friday Agreement and the future of Northern Ireland within the UK.
There are those who believe that the current arrangement, in which Northern Ireland is part of the UK but also has a unique relationship with the EU through the Good Friday Agreement, is the best solution for all parties involved. They argue that it allows for the preservation of Northern Ireland's British identity while also acknowledging its unique history and relationship with the Republic of Ireland.
However, there are also those who believe that the current arrangement is untenable in the long term and that a re-united United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland is the only viable solution. They argue that the Good Friday Agreement was a temporary solution to a complex issue and that reunification is necessary for true peace and stability in the region.
Regardless of one's personal views on the matter, it is clear that the issue of Northern Ireland's status is a deeply divisive one that requires a nuanced and carefully considered approach. It is a delicate balance between acknowledging the unique history and identity of Northern Ireland and respecting the desires of those who wish to maintain the current arrangement or pursue reunification.
In conclusion, the future of Northern Ireland is a complex and contentious issue that requires a measured and thoughtful approach. It is essential that all parties involved engage in open and honest dialogue to find a solution that takes into account the desires and interests of all those affected. ....
> " the issue of Northern Ireland's status "
Let the Chatbots negotiate an agreement. Each side can select their favourite bot, trained on their own data. The result can't be much worse then anything humans negotiators have come up over the years.
Number of IRA incidents in London, 1990 until Good Friday agreement in 1997: 86
Number of IRA incidents in London since 1997: 8, with none after 2001.
Those are rough numbers from Wikipedia bulletpoints but you get the idea. So while I share your dismay at the current set of clowns, it can definitely get worse. Tony Blair gets, and deserves, a lot of stick for Iraq, but I will eternally give him a gold star for "getting Ulster done".
He didn't get Ulster done. The IRA were practically finished and Sinn Féin knew they had no hope forcing unification through violence, so they gave it up. Blair just took credit for something that was going to happen anyway, like the lying little shit he was.
Nope. There is no way that peace was going to spontaneously break out just because Sinn Fein were making no headway, that's not how things work - they fester and bubble rather than going away. Try and name one insurgency that disappeared all by itself - I can't. Blair and Mo Mowlam came in, and the latter in particular got the respect of both sides for the first time, managed to get them to make progress and actually achieve results rather than letting it simmer.
Oh you do care. You care very much. You care that it attracts enough eyeballs for long enough to sell advertising space.
You don't care what it means.
I am getting really fed up with an internet that exists largely for people to monetise with a method popularised eighty years ago: with very few exceptions, there isn't a TV or Radio broadcaster out there who cares about anything more than the bottom line. They certainly don't care about the material being broadcast as long as it keeps the views/listeners amused between the adverts; without a doubt the corporates running the bullshit clickbait websites have exactly the same cares.
Remember when the internet was going to be the sum of all human knowledge?
A plague upon all their houses!
An A.I. cannot write anything that is truly of interest to me or many of us, perhaps – aside from a curiosity at what the algorithms are capable of through scientific interest in the numbers and mathematics, of course – but I fear that they can still write *enough*. The truth is simply that there's a very low bar for content. Enough is easy to achieve.
Consider Netflix as a case study. Today's binge-watchable series are invariably one-trick ponies: they have mastered precisely one of the story teller's arts: the hook to bring you back. Every episode is a waste of time, meaningless. Characters are not developed, worlds and places are not explored, theories and philosophies are not elaborated, in fantasy the story does not indulge, and questions it does not confront. Instead, in the dying minutes of any episode, a hook is placed simply to get the viewer to begin the next expisode in which nothing at all will happen, either.
Ceasing between episodes is consequently uncomfortable but, should one abandon ANY of these "binge watchable" things at T=10 minutes into any episode, one very quickly realises that they've no real reason – besides boredom – to pick it up, again.
Can an A.I. write this? Surely it can or it will be able to, soon – perhaps only two academic papers down the line.
Researchers have studied how free pornography and "tube-sites" exploit the dopamine loop in the brain. If A.I. could reproduce this exploit with matter that is both free of taboo and that does not trigger any interruption by a refractory period, the result could be devastating.
Could A.I. power a pleasure-button that many – like rats – would press until they die? In fact, it will not be necessary to press the button – we've "autoplay" for that and the 60-second video format – close the feedback loop with "telemetry" and any control engineer can tell you what can be built.
"Julia was twenty-six years old... and she worked, as he had guessed, on the novel-writing machines in the Fiction Department. She enjoyed her work, which consisted chiefly in running and servicing a powerful but tricky electric motor... She could describe the whole process of composing a novel, from the general directive issued by the Planning Committee down to the final touching-up by the Rewrite Squad. But she was not interested in the final product. She "didn't much care for reading," she said. Books were just a commodity that had to be produced, like jam or bootlaces."
Here is how ChatGPT "wins" at chess.
I thought your link was going to be that one. I don't know which AI enthusiast down-voted you, it surely wasn't me. As a bit of fun, the game of chess with ChatGPT is laugh-out-loud entertainment, but it's also a serious demonstration that there is *no intelligence* in the system. It makes outrageous moves, resurrects lost pieces and ends up with four rooks. Even a three-year old would know, after the fourth time of telling "You can't do that" that they simply don't know the rules. "Give me a game of chess" ought to get the response "I have no idea how to do that".
The serious illumination comes when you compare this interaction with one where the same woefully undependable output is produced in relation to something important, and it's not obviously wrong. Google fouled up with the priority of the JWST, a mistake that any knowledgeable individual would spot [1] but it won't be long before people are making real-world decisions using machines which think that it's a good idea to castle and take one's own bishop.
[1] I didn't remember the earlier exoplanet image; the LLM remark seemed plausible to me...
The people who are paying you for your art would rather not pay you. They're actively seeking a way around you, because artists are tricky. Humans are messy.
People in power don't want [employees pushing back or having their own ideas], you know? So that's not your lifetime, that's like your next birthday. And before then, they're going to challenge how much they pay you. So everyone's gonna be an independent worker. "Look at all the independence you have! Let's not have unions."
This post has been deleted by its author
I put to you that in this case there are many questions around artistic expression, the meaning of media, and how artists are going to be treated. So unlike usual, it is actually reasonable to include media people in the discussion.
But of course they picked Keanu because he was in THE movie about men vs their machines. Does that give him any more value as a speaker? I suppose it means that he is more likely to have given these issues a lot of thought, and I kind of get the impression that Keanu is reasonably intelligent so that wouldn't surprise me.
Basically, I'd be more interested in Keanu's take than that of my local grocer for reasons beyond "Hey it's Ted Theodore Logan talking about philosophy!"
Because he his speaking about its impact on the creative arts, a thing he probably knows a lot more than most.
Add into the fact you can have the greatest expert in the world, but if that person is so dull and dry, that you give up after the first paragraph, it's often best to choose a better orator, even if less "qualified".
On the basis of it's words if nothing else. In my opinion not work more, but also not less.
I would say he is somewhat more coherent than the characters he often plays, and the people that wrote them. Also more coherent than people in the US or UK governments, for what that's worth. Blind leading the blind and all, but we DID vote for them, and that's on us. So he is batting above the people that run this madhouse, who at the moment seem like genuine idiots, and can't keep their own foots out of their mouths.
There will be no "singularity". A machine, and the running thereof, is entropy poor. They break. Constantly. And are not self-healing. They cannot, and will not, "take over" until they are capable of running their entire supply chain, and the care and feeding of all THAT ... without Human help. The very concept is laughable. When was the last time you tried to make a simple steam powered traction engine, from scratch, starting with raw ore? Now try it with a simple late '70s era pocket calculator. You really think an intelligent machine could somehow marshal the necessary forces to reproduce, even one random part at a time?
As long as there is one Human in the chain, the plug can be pulled ... thus no Singularity.
> All it means is that you don't care what the words say as long as there are words there.
This has been the situation for decades now.
To an extent, I can forgive the thinking of the owners of and salesmen in the TV & radio stations, magazines and websites: they have airtime and page space to fill, sold by the hour or by the half page. Just so long as enough of it is sold to pay the bills, there is no time to dig deeply into everything; you can understand their cynicism about all the "Content" as they get on with filling up next week's quota.
But then you come across people who happily claim to be "Creatives" that are "Creating Content".
Not authors intent on enthralling their readers, not musicians wanting to surprise the listener with unexpected emotion, not producers and directors who want to grip the audience and send them out into the lobby cheerfully arguing about the layers in what they'd just witnessed. No, they are "Creating Content" because pablum is too good a word to waste on their output
These are the people to worry about, the ones who'll gleefully turn to turn ChatGPT and manage to genuinely believe that they are using it to be "productive" and, gawd help us all, "useful" or even "important" as they increase the flood.
But then you come across people who happily claim to be "Creatives" that are "Creating Content". These are the people to worry about, the ones who'll gleefully turn to turn ChatGPT and manage to genuinely believe that they are using it to be "productive" and, gawd help us all, "useful" or even "important" as they increase the flood. ..... the one in the corner
And the ones which others with every right and full expectation to fear and be terrorised by the understandable vengeful wrath of oppressed and repressed populations, both home team grown and based foreign far away, if they would even just start to think to wilfully resist welcome novel changes, are those able to both realise and manage further enabling eventful creative content via remote practically autonomous virtual presentation with augmented ethereal media productions aiding and abetting desired directions/destinations/starting points.
So don't be a victim or target of that future certainty is sound advice to heed and not forget to always remember.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
