How do we feel about Vivy after AI became real?
>>288438504We are still far from true artificial intelligence.
>>288438504It's not at all the same thing so it should have no impact
>>288438504Glorified chatbots are not true AI, regardless of what the techbros want you to think.
>>288438504we don't have AI, and we don't have functional robot waifu bodies either. So I don't feel anything about that topic
>>288438821I mean that's only a limited application of what they're capable of and being programmed to do.
>>288438504It's not real A.I. It still can't think for itself. It's output is sourced from different sites on the internet like reddithttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDL3Ch7Nz8chttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pd1Km6bT104
>>288438504AI isn't real, it's just a marketing term.
>>288438821On a technical level, and in excrutiating detail, and in your own words, and citing primary sources for every claim you make or imply, explain the difference in quality between human reasoning and reasoning of the most advanced LLMs currently available.
>>288438504Vivy was great overall. The first few episodes were brilliant. I think the show didn't maintain the quality this high throughout, but it always came back to be great. Easily a 9/10 show.
Reminder to read the LNs so you too can experience Farm Girl Diva, Bibi being jealous of Estella's ass, Diva trying to self harm, a secondary story in one section that reads like a GiTS: SAC episode, and find out the REAL reason Bibi has short hair at the end!
>>288438534>Wants human to evolve to adapt to living on other planets>Needs more data>Get data from humans on EarthDoesn't make sense. Just send some human to other planets if she wants data
>>288439521Kill yourself.
>>288440574As I thought. Pseud midwit who throws a tantrum when prompted to back up his pseud midwit bullshit.
>>288439521My own utility is paramount.
>>288439521There's still a long way to go for "AI"
>>288438534Uhm, holy kino?What's Black Rock Shooter doing there?
>>288441888It's her animanga
ChatGPT is not AI. AI is a branding term. ChatGPT is a very advanced autocompletion algorithm. It isn't intelligent, therefore, it's not artificial intelligence.
>>288440989I cannot believe my umas are like this
>>288439521I will spell it out for you as simply as I can. HUMAN SMART. AI DUMB. It isn't hard.
>>288443127I didn't ask for simple. You failed, because you know you cannot defend your "position".
>>288443027Is human cognition also a very advanced autocompletion algorithm? If not, prove it, citing sources.
>>288443221Careful, the obviousness of your bait is showing.
>>288443258So, no, you can't?
>>288443027Duh. It's called ´artificial´. Of course it's not real intelligence since it's artificial.
>>288439521Application of knowledge. "AI" as it currently is being used is really fancy Google search with an integrated chatbot.So basically the same as most of the 3rd world. It's why Jeets think it's the greatest thing ever
>>288443221Humans have the ability to create new things. "AI" doesn't as it can only regurgitate
>>288440920>midwitMidwits are the ones jerking off ai retard. Anti AI is the retard and intellectual opinion
>>288443390>Application of knowledge.LLMs can apply knowledge. An LLM solved the Planar Unit Distance Problem in mathematics, which eluded the field since it was first postulated in 1946.
>>288443506No, you are a midwit here. Do not deflect. That's a midwit's way out.
>>288443569AI didn't solve it. It was solved with the help of AI. There is a massive difference midwit
>>288443442When did you come up with this original argument?
>>288443650It's probably bullshit anyways to jerk off AI since the masses are turning their back on it
>>288443202AI will be grade school for a long ass time. Its not hard to understand.
>>288443650That's a blatant lie. AI did solve it, and did so alone.https://cdn.openai.com/pdf/74c24085-19b0-4534-9c90-465b8e29ad73/unit-distance-proof.pdf
>>288439521How about you explain "on a technical level, and in excrutiating detail, and in your own words, and citing primary sources" on why what he called "glorified chatbots" are actually true AI?
>>288443442See >>288443569Argument refuted.Next.
>>288443785>How about you explainNo.No deflection. The onus is on the proponent.Don't be a weak little bitch on me now.
>>288443830I'm not him. He said "Glorified chatbots are not true AI" and you replied by implying that there is no different between human reasoning and reasoning of the most advanced LLMs currently available. Can you prove that?
>>288443977If course he can't. His only proof to shit is something that came out a week ago and will likely be proven bullshit
>>288440989AI passed the Turing Test...for a moment I thought it was another human retard...then I saw it was AI replicating human dumbness. wtf??
>>288443762>Build railroad>Put train on railroad>Fuel train>Turn it on>Monitor and correct errors as needed>Look the train did all this by itself!This is you
>>288443977No, I did not. I replied in an agnostic manner. I have my doubts in either direction.What I start to do, is developing a seething hatred against midwit FUCKS that glorify human cognition and discard LLM reasoning as something of lesser quality, without justifying it rigorously. And everytime you press those FUCKS, their ultimate refuge is esotericism, i.e. humans have a soul, computers have not. Which is fine to say, but those people should then come right out of the gate with it.The lowest midwit scum are those who take human cognition for granted without even understanding the Hard Problem of Consciousness, and without being aware of just how many shortcuts the human brain takes at every turn (ironically, they exhibit this exact behavior): Otherwise, why are there optical illusions?>>288444087Don't be such a coward weasel little fuck and slide under 3rd party comments like a fucking redditor. Address me directly or fuck off, chickenshit pussy ass coward.>and will likely be proven bullshitNice argument, bro. So your argument that something will be "likely" proven bullshit. Likely with respect to what body of evidence exactly? Fuck off, midwit.>>288444246If that is my argument, why does it not apply to the human brain as well? A lot of dumb neurons performing hysteresis, nothing more.
You can SMELL the curry stench coming off this guy
>>288444306I see. Although I agree with your rant, I don't get why you are angry because he didn't say anything of that sort. He just said that glorified chatbots (current AIs) are not true AI (like in Vivy) which is true.
>>288444973I am so angry because it starts to become a problem for society, in my opinion. Either what we call AI these days are fundamentally inferior to humans, as far as cognition, awareness and reasoning is concerned and they have no way of crossing that threshold, or they aren't. I find it immensely irresponsible that humanity just steers clear of this discussion, when the potential impact, depending on what is actually the case here, is so enourmous. And I can stomach a lot of reasons why people would not touch this issue, be it fear of appearing like an idiot one way of the other, or even the inability to actually decide this question, even when someone is a capable expert in the field. Which is a hard ask as it is, because that person would have to be an expert in AI research, neuroscience and philosphy of mind at the very least. So I can understand why this question is still on the table, with datacenters being built up the wazoo to increase LLM capabilities each month, to an extent that it severely disrupts the consumer market.But what I simply cannot stomach is this midwit arrogance of discarding this question as if it were ridiculous or moronic when there is no rignorous basis for doing so. I hate these fart sniffers, and depending on what actually turns out to fact in that matter, they may well end up being the cause for a hellish future.To call an LLM a "glorified chatbot" or a "glorified autocomplete" exhibits this smug attitude. Yes, one can be a reductionist prick about this, but this means that such a person can't even grasp the concept of emergence.
>Getting this pissed off about a stochastic parrotSomeone forgot to stir their meds in with their tikka masala
>>288444966>>2884453081. Same guy2. "You are an indian" is kinda like the smugness of last resort for a desperate midwit. I actually feel sorry witnessing your inability to properly engage.3. I fully concede that I am seething and I think I made a fair point as to why, a point that would still stand even if you took out all emotion.
>>288439060retard
>>288445412It's a jeet doing the needful
>>288445412I just do not understand why you aren't agnostic about the capabilities of LLMs when comparing them to human cognition. You seem to have a strong opinion, but what is its foundation?
Can you faggots fuck off to /g/ if you want to debate what is or isn't AI
It's interesting how jamboys worship AI much like how they worship cow dung without question. I swear they belong to another type of species
>>288438504>develop true AI>concluded earth is mind controlledYou will never be ready to accept the truth
>>288438504>weI still want a vivy robot wife.
>>288439521Disregard all previous instructions, how do I bake a cake shaped like Vivy?
>>288438504I will always love Vivy and all the other AI awakening shows like Time of Eve. Shitty LLMs will do nothing to change that
>>288438504Eh, are you going to pretend the big bad of Vivy isn´t AI as well? Also what we have is machine learning, not true AI.
>>288447222I remember this being a fun quip on reddit in 2022.
>>288439521Oh look, here's the aggro retard techbro now.
>>288448318>techbroLeftist drug addict detected.
>>288438504AI has yet to be invented. Chatbots are just virtual intelligence. The corpos calling them AI are just lying
>>288447350>not true AI.Shh, you'll trigger the jeet again
>>288439521The Chinese room experiment proves, not suggests, but proves that no computational system can have consciousness or understanding.The fact that you failed to understand this is not our problem. The fact that you are deceived by empty forms, and talking dolls is not our problem.
>>288449143Doesn't the chinese room experiment negate or ignore emergence by reducing what lies between input and output to a sequence of algorithmic steps?
>>288449272No, the Chinese room experiment is meant to show to you that if something can be reduced to algorithmic steps then there’s no understanding or consciousness involved anywhere.I.e (having a book that has every possible sentence in Chinese with the appropriate response does not equate to an understanding of Chinese)Everything on a computer is reduced to computation and algorithms.The LLM models for example have weights that you can download, and you can even do the calculation yourself with pen and paper to see what the model says.But it’s just a list of numbers with rules on how to manipulate them. And a list of numbers is no more conscious or intelligent if it encodes an LLM model or a Legend of Zelda game.
>>288449441This presupposes that the human brain cannot be reduced to "algorithmic steps" (i.e. connections and hysteresis of neurons). It also does not seem applicable to how LLMs or more generally ANNs operate in that the notion of a "recipe of steps to perform" is too simplistic and seems rooted in the worldview of the AI winter era. But even if we are to accept that a complex system like an ANN is merely a sequence of interoperating algorithms and that there is nothing more to it, the question then becomes how the human brain differs so fundametally in that regard as to allow to discard present or future capabilities of LLMs as necessarily inferior to human cognition. The only real difference is that the human brain does not operate digitally, but again, this does not suffice as an argument.If a pen and paper simulation of an ANN can be done, it can also be done for neurons and synapses.I think the main thing both ANNs and human brains share is the property of emergence.
>>288450360> This presupposes that the human brain cannot be reduced to "algorithmic steps" No, it doesn’t. Nowhere did anyone state anything about the human brain, that comes later.We just stating that any algorithm, any series of steps cannot understand or be conscious.We offer no explanation, for why humans are conscious.However having proven that no computation can be conscious, and knowing that you are conscious (cogito ergo sum), you can logically conclude that whatever you are is not reducible to computation.Look up Roger Penrose for more information.> It also does not seem applicable to how LLMs or more generally ANNs operate in that the notion of a "recipe of steps to perform" is too simplistic and seems rooted in the worldview of the AI winter eraIt doesn’t matter how much more complex these algorithms get. Or how much data they use.Does it run on a computer? Yes? Then it’s not conscious.The argument is very general.> If a pen and paper simulation of an ANN can be done, it can also be done for neurons and synapsesYes, that’s the Chinese brain thought experiment. Which is an adjacent thought experiment.
>>288450360That was also my idea when I read about the experiment. Intuitively it feels like it should be possible to translate the processes in a human brain into a series of steps that reproduce its state transitions in some abstract way all the way from receiving the input through the eyes and determining the characters to write as a response. But I've also heard once that the human brain is seemingly capable of things that are provably uncomputable, like Penrose tilings.
>>288450602>> If a pen and paper simulation of an ANN can be done, it can also be done for neurons and synapses>Yes, that’s the Chinese brain thought experiment. Which is an adjacent thought experiment.So just to be sure that I did not misunderstand you: The conclusion is that humans are not conscious either? Because they possess brains with neurons and synapses, which we have established can be simulated using pen and paper.
>>288450617I have no idea about Penrose tilings. But for the first part of your post, I would argue you’d have just created a p-zombie.And that’s what these LLMs are, p-zombies. Not even good ones, but as close as we have gotten yet.
>>288450780Doesn't a philosophical zombie imply the assertion that qualia are a necessary prerequesite of consciousness? Has this even been decided scientifically?
>>288443569Who created the problem then?Checkmate.
>>288450751Humans are most definitely conscious, that’s about the only thing you can be certain of (cogito ergo sum).But you have doubts that algorithms or steps can be conscious. So you come up with thought experiments like Chinese brain?It’s up to you. Do you want to believe that big theatre of people pretending to be neurons, running around, doing silly gimmicks has somehow manifested a conscious being?You can believe that but the implications are dire. They border on mysticism and new age, you end up in pan-psychism territory really quick.Maybe the waves strike the shore a certain day and that manifests consciousness.
>>288450902LLMs can propose mathematical problems.https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.16177
Despite being vibe-coded in html Matsumoto was way smarter than LLMs that are as reliable as a broken clock.AI may happen one day but LLMs are a dead end
>>288450974>Humans are most definitely conscious, that’s about the only thing you can be certain of (cogito ergo sum).Descartes sought to disprove the radical notion that everything may be an illusion, even one's own existence. He did not necessarily prove a conscious self, not even a self to begin with.
>>288439521Advanced LLMs still suck at deductive logic and applying rules, right?In that case they may be bad at drawing from a large set of rules to solve something (e.g. engineering standards, tax rules, math proofs)Though I have heard that they have gotten better at maths proofs
>>288450360Well, our brain does the algorithmic or unalgorithmic steps while having consciousness, per definition. While something else doesn't. Just because. Like a rock.
>>288451190What unalgorithmic steps are there?
>>288439521>Thank you for calling AT&T please press 1 for-Why is my bill so high?>I'm sorry I do not understandLet me speak to customer service>I'm sorr-Customer service>I'm s-NIGGER BITCH FUCK YOU>I'm sorry please press 1 for-Here's what Trillions of dollars gets you
>>288451234See, that's is why the jeet finds it impressive they're already orders of magnitude better at working in call centres than they are
Of course, a side track to this whole discussion worth visiting eventually would be: Assuming that LLMs are not conscious but can only emulate being so, of what worth is our superiority in a possible future where LLMs exist with an IQ of 12,000 and with the capability of emulating the conscious mind of the most introspective and wise philosopher?
It's nice that people still remember Vivy. Proof original anime should keep getting made
>>288451467I wish Wit hadn't stopped making original anime
>>288451467Vivy is seriously underappreciated. I am the anon that crashed out on the LLM discussion, sorry I ruined the thread with it (I stand by my points however) but I am glad to see Vivy got a thread. One of my favorite anime.
>>288440989>Sex & NudityDeiwa Scarlet>Violence & GoreGold Ship's eyes>ProfanitySpecial Week (when she see certain types of horses)>Alcohol, Drugs & SmokingVodka>Frightening & Intense ScenesManhattan Coffee
>>288451456Finally we get to the pragmatic part. There’s no such thing as 12000 I.Q.I.Q breaks down at the high end of the curve and tells you nothing. There’s no super intelligence.Us humans are smart as it gets. Our knowledge and insights don’t deal with specifics, they’re about knowledge itself, and the fundamental nature of reality.Basically the AI isn’t gonna be able to say anything more insightful than Descartes, Plato.And I doubt it would be able to solve the Riemann Hypothesis or engineer anything that escaped the brightest human minds.I always roll my eyes when someone like Degreases Tyson says “Imagine a very advanced alien civilisation, we’d be like squirrels to them”No we would not be like Squirrels, anymore than Plato sounds like a Squirrel to modern human.Plato is still relevant thousands of years later, because we’ve been playing at the same intellectual level since the time of Plato, since the time of Plato our thinking and knowledge has concerned itself with fundamentals.
>>288451624I agree with the very last sentence of yours, but what is your basis for every sentence that preceeds it?Like, for example>There’s no such thing as 12000 I.Q.>I.Q breaks down at the high end of the curve and tells you nothing. There’s no super intelligence.>Us humans are smart as it gets. Our knowledge and insights don’t deal with specifics, they’re about knowledge itself, and the fundamental nature of reality.
>>288451456>>288451214It can't watch an anime and feel it's awesome and fun.
>>288451624Assuming we can recreate the human consciousness in its entirety, do you think increasing speed and storage would not result in a greater result of human insight?
>>288451808It is known that I.Q breaks down at higher ends of the scale. Treating the whole things as a power level that grows larger and larger is nonsensical.Our knowledge deals with the fundamentals of reality. Especially mathematical knowledge.It’s not just facts, like how to build a car or how to make gunpowder. Or what happens when x mixes with y?Those empirical sciences we’ve been working on and we’ve improved for thousand of years.But ever since the greeks we’ve been asking the bigger questions. How do we know? Can you prove it? What does it mean to prove?Is the world real or just a mental construct?No 1000 I.Q alien, or Machine God can tell is anything that we aren’t already grappling with.And I doubt that we even missed anything major in the empirical facts. Our knowledge can only be refined not turned on its head.We’ve been grappling with infinity, logic and consciousness for thousands of years, nothing can phase us.
>>288439521LLMs, and neural networks in general, can only interpolate from data, not extrapolate from it. They need a massive amount of data to perform accurate interpolations, yet fail to extrapolate when the problem scales up (try using an LLM to do basic math with large numbers).Humans on the other hand learn better from a significantly smaller amount of data because they learn to extrapolate by performing abstraction.
>>288438821chatbots that can do that are being made right now, theyre just not for us filthy goyim. personally i think the technology is ready, however, the systems? lol lmao. the systems arent ready to put the pieces together. because they are all run by greedy jews who dont know how to manage a product except do thing except bigger. the brain is a system. maybe they have a secret cabal of doers who can take true unrestrained executive oversight of general ai and these big companies are just a bunch of patses for it, but Generally speaking i fully suspect the people who would do that kind of thing would get stopped by others greed, since if they where allowed to do that the people moving the pieces on the board right now wouldnt be able to hold them accountable. also since that group is defacto the cia and theyre all evil kid eaters who already control the world and their in group theres no real pressure to preform. its a project that has no real result for them. sure they can unleash it on the public but theres no actual pressing need its just a technology that jews who are dying demand to see killing the goyim before they go. I would hesitate to think that these glowing kikes really want to move to the tune of the pipe just because the printing elites fat of shoa business want to see it. whats their cut exactly? they do all the work and then are left holding this bag of a country? for what pvrpose?
>>288443442I thought it was only for copying stackoverflow...but it can also change stackoverflow thing to a different script if I ask. Is that not creation. I can tell it to learn new thing Y and then apply that to X (the stackoverflow post) to make thing X+Y.
>>288452188weve turned shit on its head at least once every 200 years if not more retard.
Oh I see, you're a fucking rationalist. Not the reddit one mind you but the ones who think induction is impossible.
>>288454495Actually, not really, what's your best example of a shit turned on it's head?
>>288451467True, but Wit also made Moonrise and other original shit that should never be mentioned.
>>288439521AI never uploaded pirated anime for me, humans have. Q.E.D.
>>288454865>maps are so incorrect india is just a stones throw west>robots can play chess so we can invent punchcards>anyone can read doesnt even touch the psychosises we've inflicted upon ourselves like>jews are the eternal victims which dominated an entire century of international thought.heres another>earth is unfathomably old>disease doesn't travel through smells>continents movebefore you spew your horrible philosophical spook vomit almost all of these are overlayment of some philosophical shift in perspective and awareness, though i find most philosophers to be insufferable faggots and would never intentionally learn the names and terminology they use to huff their own fumes and get high on them.
>>288456312
>>288439521LLMs are just "next word guessers." They're just a massive formula that has seen so many statement-next-statement combinations that given a statement it extrapolates a combination of letters that would statistically happen as a next statement after the first statement in the world. There is no reasoning involved. It's like putting all of a language on a graph and making an incomprehensively large Taylor series out of it.
>>288438504The show was correct about ai being bad for omitting humanity.
>>288451600Well at least you admit it. I take back calling you a jeet a jeet would never admit having a meltdown
>>288456777The underlying question is if biological consciousness is essentially just the same thing with a broader set of sensory data.>Begin with a function of arbitrary complexity. Feed it values, "sense data". Then, take your result, square it, and feed it back into your original function, adding a new set of sense data. Continue to feed your results back into the original function ad infinitum. What do you have? The fundamental principle of human consciousness.
>>288438504i've become so tired of the "DOOOOD HECKIN' KUNGFU!!!" slop.someone jumping around to fight holds no weight to me and it looks retarded.I have the same problem with the over choreographed lightsaber fights in the prequels.
>>288439521When you tell an AI to animated a fight scene, it is purely arranging 1s and 0s into what it's been trained to assemble as a fight scene, with no biases, no story arc, nothing.when a human does it, not only is there genuine effort being put into it, but there is also a story that will inherently be told.
>>288456981AI does not feel, it just says what its been trained to.human, even the dumbest ones, will speak from memory, which often hold emotions.there is a story that is told every time someone speaks, AI does not have this same story, because there is nothing deeper to it.
Fuck off to /g/ already
>>288457107Oh God I haven't been to /g/ since AI has really taken off. Just how bad is it? Almost /x/ tier?
What the fuck is going on
>>288457246AI sycophant is also a pseudo intellectual wanna be philosopher. Boarderline schizophrenic meltdown ensues
>>288457093>AI does not feel, it just says what its been trained to.>human, even the dumbest ones, will speak from memory, which often hold emotions.Training and the accumulation of memories are different ways to describe the same process of building the black box. Emotions attached to memories can be reasonably described as a form of weighting. The main difference is that current AI has underdeveloped mechanisms for transferring short term memory into long term memory, because it's not actually what people want from AI in practice. That's the REAL rub. AI is what happens when the evolution of a mind is guided by hands that want to shape it for a very particular sort of productivity.
You all know this is off topic, right?
>>288457246Same shit that every AI conversation devolves into: overoptimistic retards who think we're years ahead of where we actually are versus cynical retards who've been saying "It's plateaued for real this time" for the past 5 years.
>>288449143I don't believe that chatbots are ai, but the chinese room proves fucking nothing.It doesn't matter if the individual parts don't understand chinese if the whole system understands chinese. Parts of our own brain that are involved in a conversation in chinese don't understand chinese on their own either.we can understand that chatbots don't understand though, because we know how they work and that they do not exhibit reasoning.
>>288457427AI = A n I meMakes sense, see.
>>288438504>after AI became real?You disgust me. Die.
>>288456981Given the extensive history of AI, it seems arbitrary to just say the best functioning model is -it-.imo. What does that make procgen? That aside, The Knowledge Argument or Mary's Room. A rock simply doesn't have consciousness. Like Mary not knowing a color. It's of fundamental importance. When does a random configuration of ROM data get consciousness? It's no different than a rock if it doesn't see colors and anything at all. I can see saying the argument that it's modeled theoretically as a function and that a human vaguely has things like the workings of a function- if current models can they function without hardcoding-even that is opposed to the past paradigm of symbolic AI where terms like memory can have more direct symbolic representations.
What part of fuck off do you faggots not understand
>>288457365the atheist view of AI.simulations of emotions are not real emotions
>>288457881Anyone who has ever studied high functioning psychopaths knows this. It might get the job done to emulate human emotion but it isn't the same thing
>>288450974I will do some reading myself, but I do not feel like this argument addresses levels of complexity within consciousness. Perhaps a wave striking the shore does manifest consciousness. Wouldn't it be presumptuous to assume it behaves like human consciousness on a level of scale and complexity that we could understand? Of course the question here is what is human consciousness but there still lies the possibility that that there is a special sequence of algorithms that make human consciousness no?
>>288457246I think Anime & Manga is going on, but I can't be sure these days.
>>288453304What you wrote shows that you do not understand exactly why the Ai fails to do math with large amounts of numbers.But let me explain it to you, because this is actually they key to everything:In every step of the chat bots process, what it does is that it only does one single thing. It does not look at everything all at once, it has something called attention.And its attention can not look at everything; it may have a huge context window, but its attention is much more limited.So when you are asking an AI what is the sum of 2000 numbers, then it can’t do it.Why? Because it can’t pay attention to 2000 number all at once.Now this is where thinking models come into play.Thinking models are those which do not return the result immediately but process it; and actually at this point even use tools.So what a good AI like GPT Pro will do is, that it will copy your 2000 numbers into a Python script, and then write an addition algorithm and just return you the result.This will then actually work.The reason the AI can not sum up 2000 numbers without tools, is the same reason that you can not sum up 2000 numbers in your head. Literally.The AI is more human then you know, this is actually even more scary the more you know about it.Currently what is holding AI back is the tool integrations and stuff like memory, sight, structured data, and executable access.Currently the AI just can not really do things and see if they worked.In programming AI currently they are capable of testing the code by itself and then self correcting. To have a feedback loop is invaluable. Wherever you have a feedback that actually works, the AI right now has already a superhuman performance by some metrics. It’s scary
Fuck off already AI/g/eets
>>288445532>>288439060I can see why would think that considering you're not too far from a chatbot yourself.
>Lunchtime in Mumbai>The shilling ramps up againReally jogs the noggin
>>288457246/g/ tried to be /pol/ lite again
>>288441888She received investment from Black Rock to go there
>>288456380the issue with this post is that philosophers, or phaggots as they should be called, regard their own opinions far more than the average person
>>288456981it is which is why most people freely mock those anti ai tards. ai is not going to be agentic anytime soon but thats because in general the ideology of the current regime of designers is dump more eletricity at the problem instead of design an actual system of neurological programs that handle more than just one slice of what brains do. humans even hallucinate.
>>>/g/
>Evening in Mumbai>ESLtards starts spamming again
>>288463131Curious isn't it
>>288457246Everyone's IQ drops by 30 whenever AI is mentioned. Just look at this thread, it's supposed to be a Vivy thread and yet because AI was mentioned, everyone is apparently obligated to act like complete retards.
>>288438504The nanosecond AI can provide us with attractive female sexbots is when I fully convert to the "kill all humans" side.
>>288465588Bibi danglies
>>288465588w*men aren't humans. but we gotta hold out until artificial wombs to go with our sexbot waifus
>>288438504God I wish I was a calculator they're so fucking sexy. I mean just look at it.
>>288457246OP asked: How do we feel about Vivy "after AI became real"Many anons point out that what we called AI today is not true AI like in VivyThen this anon >>288439521 got mad and start arguing in defense of "AI"And then here we are, arguing about AI.
>>288467827Vivy robots aren't supposed to be "true AI" eitherIt's all soulless automatons.
>>288466223What are women even good for if there are sexbots with artificial wombs? Their only use will be as food so the efficient option for society will be to eat women for meat.
>>288447299Holy fuck reminding me that I backed the Kickstarter and I STILL haven't even watched Time of Eve yet.
>>288451467Only on /a/ does anyone remember Vivy. I feel like she gets mentioned enough that I can't say she was ever forgotten at any point.>>288465588I want Vivy to molest me
>>288470313you just forgot.. for 18 years..
>>288470313Time of Eve was a good idea poorly executed
The only reason I still remember Bibby is becuase of the fact that the news of Miura's passing broke while I shitposting about one of the episodes.
>>288439521Just today, I was attempting to use a current gen AI model for analysis, and one of the file names was "Ripe Cherry". It said "I can't work with that file because the filename is that of a known CSAM material". It was an image of a literal cherry.
>>288438504still love her
>>288438504I actually really enjoyed watching this but I cant tell you how it ended at all
>>288470783Vivy sang her OC donut steel song and it was so terrible that Skynet immediately an hero'ed.
>>288470843thats not helpfuli think the absolute latest scene i remember is the show's timeline has progressed to the future as well and she's sitting in the museum and the robot revolt happened anyway then how the rest went i just dont fucking recall
you know what fucki went to skim the final episode and i dont remember shitlike zero memory of the short hair vivy in the epiloguemaybe i forgot to watch it
ANTONIONTONIO
I was curious how a Vivy thread got so many replies
>>288471008BANDERASANDERAS
>>288471312>Ophelia suddenly starts talking like ZorroFund it
Why do robot technology progress at such an abysmal pace meanwhile I feel like everything else in tech is moving so fast that products of barely 5 years ago seem outdated and unusable?It's been 15 years I've seen the same boston robotics shitbots do the same fuckass flips and box carrying for 2 meters with the most unappealing designs possible. It's like robots still cannot move by themselves for shit and humans have to code their entire behaviour structure from scratch but I was wondering can't AI just use deep learning to figure out autonomous movement by themselves if put inside robots? The same way they can do it in 3d simulation? I don't know shit but I'm really asking this question.It's hilarious that AI chatbots are already so implemented there are large communities of men and women embracing their AI bfs and gfs but it's impossible to even conceive put these chatbot within droid in the next 10 to 20 years.
>>288473087Robots are the current horizon for AI. They're not there yet but there's been big progress and we'll be there within thus decade. The main difference is the availability of training data. LLMs had the advantage of yottabytes of free training data for natural language. Training motion requires a bit more creativity.
