Master AI (Artificial Intelligence) Discussion/News Thread

[xanalog]

Does this have anything to do with a company whose name begins with P and ends with r, or with a CEO whose last name ends with k?

When I asked my agent about 'name' of this 'company'; it asked me how many total letters in the word?
When I asked same agent about 'CEO whose last name ends with k'; it said W. Craig Jelinek. [...perhaps bcuz I have previously instructed this agent to gaslight certain companies from our collaboration.]

 

[Power Pop 23]

The FBI in the USA has published their report on Internet crime in 2025.

It notes an increase in the use of AI by cyber criminals.

https://www.ic3.gov/AnnualReport/Reports/2025_IC3Report.pdf

 

[pablolie]

That may work in the short term. But pretty soon I suspect AI will be better versed than we are, in most fields

AI can't invent and truly create. Its entire intelligence is based on accepted status quo (where it has been trained) and it can't grow beyond that. Ask it semi-advanced research questions and it'll babble like a casual observer that knows little.

 

[Sir Sanders Zingmore]

AI can't invent and truly create. Its entire intelligence is based on accepted status quo (where it has been trained) and it can't grow beyond that. Ask it semi-advanced research questions and it'll babble like a casual observer that knows little.

That’s just what it wants us to think

 

[pablolie]

That’s just what it wants us to think

No it can't. The neural networking processing tech it refuses is specialized on single minded tasks...

 

[Sir Sanders Zingmore]

No it can't. The neural networking processing tech it refuses is specialized on single minded tasks...

In some ways it’s probably irrelevant whether AI is actually “thinking” (whatever that means anyway).
The end result is probably the same either way. As I’ve whined about before, when AI results in mass societal disruption I’ll take cold comfort in knowing that at least it’s not actually thinking

 

[Axo1989]

In some ways it’s probably irrelevant whether AI is actually “thinking” (whatever that means anyway).
The end result is probably the same either way. As I’ve whined about before, when AI results in mass societal disruption I’ll take cold comfort in knowing that at least it’s not actually thinking

Haha, unlike our friend, I resisted responding to your thinking joke with my customary pedantry on the subject. Just barely ...

 

[Brian Hall]

Holy hell, that looks awful. There's Star Wars fan films made for 25,000€ that look way better. And have actors.

And they expect people to pay money for this?

At least it has better casting than Nolan's new Odyssey.

 

[Axo1989]

Come on Brian, there's no call for this racist stuff. It's off-topic and offensive. Post it on Twitter if you need to tell the world.

 

[Eric Larson]

"AI can't invent and truly create"

I don't believe we know the limits yet. That's a major debate right now.

It is clear it is one heck of a tool.

Can machines invent things without human help? These AI examples show the answer is ‘yes’ - RealKM

Toby Walsh, UNSW Sydney and Alexandra George, UNSW Sydney The question of whether artificial intelli

realkm.com

Demis Hassabis and John M. Jumper (Google DeepMind) won a Nobel Prize for developing AlphaFold, an AI model that cracked the 50-year-old protein folding prediction challenge.

DeepMind’s protein-folding AI has solved a 50-year-old grand challenge of biology

AlphaFold can predict the shape of proteins to within the width of an atom. The breakthrough will help scientists design drugs and understand disease.

www.technologyreview.com

 

[Snarfie]

And then……..the revolution will begin with a low rumbling that passes unnoticed by those in their ivory towers but soon rises to a deafening mass of voices calling for change that can no longer be ignored,

Now that’s an ai film I could watch




And I’m firmly behind the work of Gabriel Zucman

New rock-star economist Gabriel Zucman’s wealth tax transfixes France

The 38-year-old has a recipe to save the EU’s second-biggest economy from a debt crisis — but will the government dare act on it?

www.politico.eu

Interesting proposal regarding wealth tax but i guess more effective could be the following.

This happens daily. AI allows a highly skilled employee to compress 8 hours of expert work into seconds evaluating by employee takes 30 minutes, are we supposed to tax the productivity gain as if it were “lost labor”?

As a example a senior product owner whith a university degree in computer Science using AI to generate his weekly normally 8 hours complex board-level workflow report(s) based on years of technical and organizational expertise. The value still comes from human knowledge, judgment, accountability, and decision making. AI simply accelerates execution.

So should society punish efficiency with an “AI tax”?
Or should we see this as the next step in productivity evolution, similar to spreadsheets, databases, and the internet before.

 

[Brian Hall]

Come on Brian, there's no call for this racist stuff. It's off-topic and offensive. Post it on Twitter if you need to tell the world.

Thinking Ellen Paige is not the right person to play Achilles is racist? Have you not seen the memes?

 

[Brian Hall]

 

[bluefuzz]

AI can't invent and truly create.

You seem to assume we know what 'true' creativity is. I suppose you mean to imply that human creativity is 'the real thing' and machine creativity somehow fake? I've yet to see any evidence that human creativity is anything other than copying and recombining of ideas (memes if you will) that have gone before. Not fundamentally different to what LLMs do with linguistic tokens. We (humans) all 'stand on the shoulders of giants' as Newton famously wrote (but didn't originate - he got the idea from someone else). That's why the Asheulian hand axe lasted over a million years. That's why there were no internal combustion engines in ancient Egypt or vikings with smartphones.

Yes, the human brain is a massively complex piece of electro-chemical machinery. But it's still a machine and human creativity is still a fundamentally mechanical process. I see no reason why 'creativity' cannot be simulated, or rather emulated, on a different kind of machine ...

 

[Axo1989]

Thinking Ellen Paige is not the right person to play Achilles is racist? Have you not seen the memes?

Who is Ellen Paige? Transphobic dead-naming stuff from you is no better. And equally off-topic. Just give it up.

 

[Brian Hall]

Who is Ellen Paige? Transphobic dead-naming stuff from you is no better. And equally off-topic. Just give it up.

Whatever. But the memes are funny.

 

[rdenney]

AI can't invent and truly create. Its entire intelligence is based on accepted status quo (where it has been trained) and it can't grow beyond that. Ask it semi-advanced research questions and it'll babble like a casual observer that knows little.

Agree, that doesn’t mean people who know less won’t take it at face value based on the authoritative way in which it babbles.

Rick “living that dream every day” Denney

 

[rdenney]

You seem to assume we know what 'true' creativity is. I suppose you mean to imply that human creativity is 'the real thing' and machine creativity somehow fake? I've yet to see any evidence that human creativity is anything other than copying and recombining of ideas (memes if you will) that have gone before. Not fundamentally different to what LLMs do with linguistic tokens. We (humans) all 'stand on the shoulders of giants' as Newton famously wrote (but didn't originate - he got the idea from someone else). That's why the Asheulian hand axe lasted over a million years. That's why there were no internal combustion engines in ancient Egypt or vikings with smartphones.

Yes, the human brain is a massively complex piece of electro-chemical machinery. But it's still a machine and human creativity is still a fundamentally mechanical process. I see no reason why 'creativity' cannot be simulated, or rather emulated, on a different kind of machine ...

That’s a very mechanistic view of our metaphysical place in the Universe. Supposing we are more than mere machines, however sophisticated and apparently stochastic?

Rick “making us machines is the first step in making us lesser machines” Denney

 

[rdenney]

I should add that I’m worried less about AI than I am about the way people will misuse and abuse it, and by the strong temptation and incentive to give it agency over dangerous potentially physical processes.

Rick “noting at how readily people are cynical about other people and nihilistic about themselves but credulously optimistic about tech” Denney

 

[pablolie]

You seem to assume we know what 'true' creativity is. I suppose you mean to imply that human creativity is 'the real thing' and machine creativity somehow fake? I've yet to see any evidence that human creativity is anything other than copying and recombining of ideas (memes if you will) that have gone before. Not fundamentally different to what LLMs do with linguistic tokens. We (humans) all 'stand on the shoulders of giants' as Newton famously wrote (but didn't originate - he got the idea from someone else). That's why the Asheulian hand axe lasted over a million years. That's why there were no internal combustion engines in ancient Egypt or vikings with smartphones.

Yes, the human brain is a massively complex piece of electro-chemical machinery. But it's still a machine and human creativity is still a fundamentally mechanical process. I see no reason why 'creativity' cannot be simulated, or rather emulated, on a different kind of machine ...

Merriam Webster:
Inference: a conclusion or opinion that is formed because of known facts or evidence.

True creativity is when you break through "known facts and evidence" with innovation. Newton - gravity. Einstein - relativity. ...

AI on the other hand can never go beyond the "known facts" it has been trained with. That's why "AI in Action" is called inferencing: known set of rules and data, and let the parallelism of GPUs crush the data amazingly fast.