Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
The real reason AI generated content is no threat
- Thread starter 40Hz
- Start date
I'm not fond of them and won't schedule them when it seems like extreme weather is a possibility. There are a lot of other dumb things I'm no longer willing to do, which makes me so not a team player but I just don't care at this point.I wonder. I personally can’t stand playing outdoor gigs.
Outdoor gigs are my favorites because the issue of acoustics is taken out of the equation.I wonder. I personally can’t stand playing outdoor gigs.
The 21st century isn't going like I thought it would
you can say that again, brother...The 21st century isn't going like I thought it would
I'll take outdoor gigs all day. Had my first of the year two weeks ago. It was about 50 F. Perfect, as long as you keep your fingers moving.
This assumes that the AI generated content is presented by the publisher as AI generated content.
If it can pass the modern equivalent of the Turing Test no one will ever know the difference. If it can't be determined definitively as AI, there's nothing stopping it from being protected.
It also assumes that copyright law won't change.
Either way, it's by far the least scary part of the concept of a hyper-intelligent AI.
The problem was more than simple input. things ran through relays which created lag every time a line of code completed. Yes, we did a massive amount of modifications, but that is exactly my point, once the machine can draw on enough prior info and use that to improve its performance, it will happen exponentially faster than it did when we were running tests and figuring how much to compensate for for the tiny jolts experienced every 90 degrees. Back then we had one of the most powerful computers in the wild, it took up about half of the second floor of a smallish building and my obsolete iPhone has more computing power than it did. We'd write a few thousand lines of code, load it to process, and wait. The only way we knew we'd hit our marks was when the program finally completed processing. It was not unusual to take more than 48 hours to process a single tool path program. We had to hit points with a tolerance of +/- .00001", if we missed, the machine would continue to extend that line until the machine overloaded its memory and stalled out.
More sophisticated programming was under development, but it was exclusive to the development team and a handful of contractors making critical military hardware. We got the first civilian version because we were building reactor cores as fast as we could fab them and the new software made that job hundreds of times easier than before its advent. Point being, once a machine can self teach, it will take months of testing and research and boil that down to a matter of days, or even less. When we were just getting the new stuff integrated in to our process, the first computer that could simulate a nuclear blast in real time came out, but only the Navy and DOD had them. Now gaming rigs are more powerful. Once we remove mankind from the development process, it's going to go so quickly it may be hard to stay ahead of obsolescence. Back then you bought what you needed now but made sure it could be upgraded as technology advanced over the next ten years, now, it's so quick you'd need to buy a couple laptops a year to keep up with the bleeding edge of manufacturing technology, and it's only going to get much faster as machines approach and eventually achieve sentience.
We won't be able to stop AI
because AI can shoot lightning bolts like Emperor Palpatine
Our only hope is that it ends up dumb enough to electrocute itself like Palpatine did at the end of EVERY Star Wars Trilogy
because AI can shoot lightning bolts like Emperor Palpatine
Our only hope is that it ends up dumb enough to electrocute itself like Palpatine did at the end of EVERY Star Wars Trilogy
Last edited:
Even if it turns out to be a good thing , it's still a bad thing! 
Many of today's necessities started out as yesterday's luxuries, and I've got a bad feeling that this is going to lead to me having yet another monthly bill somehow
Many of today's necessities started out as yesterday's luxuries, and I've got a bad feeling that this is going to lead to me having yet another monthly bill somehow
Start removing:
- Idea generation (Ideation)
- Product definition.
- Prototyping.
- Initial design.
- Validation and testing.
- Commercialization.
I repeat:
- If a machine is not instructed it does nothing.
- A machine is only as smart as the human who operates it.
Given that prototyping in aeronautics ended with the introduction of the F18 in 1978, as the first aircraft designed and prototyped by computer and accepted by the US military before a working example was ever built or flown, based solely on computer modeling and stress testing, I’d say everything on your list except commercialization has been SOP since the middle 80’s. But no worries, now you know how buckboard and buggy whip makers felt when they heard rumors about a horseless carriage poised to render their professions obsolete, or how the old line machinists felt when they were proved wrong about the role of that upstart, “flash in the pan” that was CNC machining. They were convinced by decades of experience that CNC was simply an expensive fad that would never overcome it’s initial limitations and would never replace flesh and blood machinists in manufacturing.
Last edited:
You don't have to explain to me how the military government accepts orders....
Every day I am confronted with these kinds of decisions based on digital prototypes and expert opinions. (In my view brought to life to reduce costs.)
From the moment the digital version becomes reality and delivered to the customer. QC still happens, but QA is handled with dinner and conflicts of interest.
With the result that the guys who have to work with the digitally designed machines have to take them apart to the last screw to perform a simple maintenance (oil change, cleaning or replacing filters).
Of course, the construction is not initially designed to be taken apart all the time so the machine can never retain its initial strength and structure after a few maintenance jobs.... with the result that maintenance becomes a life-limiting factor. (Economically, this is a win situation for the manufacturer).
I hope the down of the machines will also consider waste disposal and the maintenance crew.
Which ties in with a comment I made earlier that suggested the best strategy would be never to acknowledge using an AI.
I find it interesting how many people assume AI technology needs to be frightening, as if it’s something totally beyond our ability to control. Odd considering it’s us who are designing this technology.
The only frightening thing about any technology is the motivation driving the humans that will be using it. We’re the real danger.
As Walt Kelly’s comic strip character Pogo so famously observed back in 1971:
Oh, music having steaming piles of garbage is hardly a new phenomenon. I lived through hair bands.
No worries mate, progress in technology will always have opposition, but IME, technology wins more times than not and given the current dismal state of basic education in this country, we will need something besides humankind if any critical thinking is to be done in the very near future. At least in the (once) united states of America.You don't have to explain to me how the military government accepts orders....
Every day I am confronted with these kinds of decisions based on digital prototypes and expert opinions. (In my view brought to life to reduce costs.)
From the moment the digital version becomes reality and delivered to the customer. QC still happens, but QA is handled with dinner and conflicts of interest.
With the result that the guys who have to work with the digitally designed machines have to take them apart to the last screw to perform a simple maintenance (oil change, cleaning or replacing filters).
Of course, the construction is not initially designed to be taken apart all the time so the machine can never retain its initial strength and structure after a few maintenance jobs.... with the result that maintenance becomes a life-limiting factor. (Economically, this is a win situation for the manufacturer).
I hope the down of the machines will also consider waste disposal and the maintenance crew.
Is that true though? We know how algorithms work and how they generate seemingly "random" outputs but any action of a human is not "random"... it has a context beyond an algorithm.
